Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2009-12-14 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET h Tukwila City Council Agenda o COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Jim Haggerton, Mayor Councilmembers: Joe Duffie Pamela Linder Shawn Hunstock, Interim City Administrator Dennis Robertson Verna Griffin Joan Hernandez, Council President Kathy Hougardy De'Sean Quinn To be followed by a Special Meeting Monday, December 14, 2009, 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall; Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. SPECIAL Presentation of official "Honorary D.A.R.E. Officer" proclamation to Jamie Kurfman. Pg. 1 PRESENTATION 3. CITIZEN At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda COMMENT (please limit your comments to five minutes per citizen). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. 4. PUBLIC An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City of Tukwila for the fiscal Pg. 3 HEARING year commencing January 1, 2010, on all property, both real and personal, which is subject to taxation for the purpose of paying sufficient revenue to carry on the services of several departments of the City for the ensuing year, as required by law, and repealing Ordinance No. 2262. 5. SPECIAL a. An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City of Tukwila for the fiscal Pg. 3 ISSUES year commencing January 1, 2010, on all property, both real and personal, which is subject to taxation for the purpose of paying sufficient revenue to carry on the services of several departments of the City for the ensuing year, as required by law, and repealing Ordinance No. 2262. b. An ordinance annexing approximately 259 acres of real property known as Pg. 13 the Tukwila South Project property. c. A resolution supporting the Tukwila School District's capital levy for Pg. 21 instructional technology and school improvements. Public comments will be accepted. d. A resolution expressing appreciation to Pam Linder for her years of service Pg. 29 as a Councilmember. (a short recess will be taken at this time) 6. REPORTS Please see Special Meeting Agenda. 7. MISCELLANEOUS Please see Special Meeting Agenda. 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION 9. ADJOURN TO SPECIAL MEETING SPECIAL MEETING Ord #2267 Res #1704 1. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 2. CONSENT a. Approval of Minutes: 11/23/09 (Special). AGENDA b. Approval of Vouchers. (continued...) Tukwila City Council Agenda COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE SPECIAL MEETING Monday, December 14, 2009 Page 2 SPECIAL MEETING (continued) 3. UNFINISHED a. A resolution expressing appreciation to Pam Linder for her years of service Pg. 29 BUSINESS as a Councilmember. b. An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City of Tukwila for the fiscal p 3 year commencing January 1, 2010, on all property, both real and personal, which is subject to taxation for the purpose of paying sufficient revenue to carry on the services of several departments of the City for the ensuing year, as required by law, and repealing Ordinance No. 2262. c. An ordinance annexing approximately 259 acres of real property known as Pg. 13 the Tukwila South Project property. d. A resolution supporting the Tukwila School District's capital levy for Pg. 21 instructional technology and school improvements. (Public comments will be accepted.) e. Shoreline Master Program ordinances: (Public comments will be accepted.) Pg. 33 1. An ordinance approving and adopting a Shoreline Master Program update pg. 73 for the City of Tukwila to incorporate new State requirements. 2. An ordinance updating the shoreline element of the City's Comprehensive Pg. 101 Plan to incorporate policies that reflect new State requirements for areas subject to shoreline jurisdiction. 3. An ordinance updating requirements for shoreline regulations to pg. 113 incorporate new State requirements regarding "Shoreline Overlay." 4. An ordinance updating definitions for shoreline regulations to incorporate pg. 161 new State requirements. 4. REPORTS a. Mayor c. Staff e. Intergovernmental b. City Council d. City Attorney 5. MISCELLANEOUS 6. ADJOURNMENT Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the City Clerk's Office 206 433 1800 /TDD 206 248 -2933. This notice is available at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio taped. tukwila police honorary dare officer JAMIE KURFMAN CERTIFICATION 2 COUNCIL A GENDA SYNOPSIS J`�W iLA k'q Initials ITEM No, D 0 I Meetsnn Date Prepared by Mayor' review Council revues 0 L 1 12/14/09 I SH I I Chi% I x9oa I I I I Spg G I I I I I a. ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 09-178 'ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: DECEMBER 14, 2009 AG' NDA ITEM TITLE An ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 2262 and revising the property tax levy rate and amount for 2010. CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance BtdAward Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Fire P &R Police PW SPONSOR'S The ordinance repeals Ordinance No. 2262, passed by the City Council on November 23, SUMMARY 2009, and changes the levy rate and amount to be collected for 2010. New information received from the King County Assessor's Office on December 4, 2009 significantly increased the value of new construction for levy calculation purposes for 2010. The Council is being asked to pass the Ordinance at this meeting, as it is required by the County by December 15. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DA "l E: RF,coMMENT)ATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Finance Department CoMMrrrEE Committee Chair consent to take this item directly to Council Meeting COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 12/14/09 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 12/14/09 Informational Memorandum dated 12/09/09 Ordinance 2010 Levy Worksheet Original 2010 Levy Worksheet Revised I Email from Hazel Gantz, King County Assessor's Office Levy Administration I I q 4 City of Tukwila INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton City Council FROM: Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director DATE: December 9, 2009 SUBJECT: 2010 Property Tax Levy ISSUE BACKGROUND DISCUSSION Jim Haggerton, Mayor The City was notified just last Friday afternoon that the value of new construction to be included in our levy calculation for 2010 recently increased by approximately $317 million. This increase allows the City to increase the 2010 levy rate, but the original levy ordinance, Ordinance No. 2262, must be repealed and replaced before December 15 Ordinance No. 2262 was passed by the City Council on November 23, 2009. At that time, the value of new construction included in our levy calculation, per the King County Assessor's Office, was $24,856,302. This resulted in a levy rate of $2.52 and total collections of approximately $12,500,000 for 2010. Last Friday I was notified by the Assessor's Office that the final levy calculation for Tukwila now includes new construction of $341,888,573. This represents an increase of $317,032,271 over the original amount. The increased value for new construction means the City can levy up to $13,236,301 for 2010. This represents an increase of $736,301 from the amount originally passed under Ordinance No. 2262. The resulting levy rate would be $2.67, which is an increase of $0.15 from the $2.52 passed by City Council on November 23 City Council has the option of not increasing the levy rate beyond what was already passed on November 23 The City could take advantage of the difference of $736,301 in subsequent years if assessed values do not go down overall. The new levy rate of $2.67 would be an increase of $0.29676, or 12.5 from the 2009 levy rate of $2.37324. For an average home of $250,000 in value, the City portion of property taxes would be $667.50, an increase of $74.19 over 2009. 5 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve the Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 2262, and implementing a revised levy rate and amount for 2010. This item is scheduled to be discussed at the December 14, 2009 Committee of the Whole meeting and the Special Meeting that same evening. ATTACHMENT Ordinance 2010 Levy Worksheet Original 2010 Levy Worksheet Revised Email from Hazel Gantz, King County Assessor's Office, Levy Administration 6 1 \tukstore\ Shawn -H$\I nfoMemo_2010LevyRepeal.docx A• City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, LEVYING THE GENERAL TAXES FOR THE CITY OF TUKWILA IN KING COUNTY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2010, ON ALL PROPERTY, BOTH REAL AND PERSONAL, IN SAID CITY, WHICH IS SUBJECT TO TAXATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYING SUFFICIENT REVENUE TO CARRY ON THE SERVICES OF THE SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS OF SAID CITY FOR THE ENSUING YEAR, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2262: PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on November 23. 2009, the City Council of the City of Tukwila Passed Ordinance No. 2262. levying the general taxes for the City for the fiscal year commencing Tanuary 1, 2010; and WHEREAS, on December 4.2009, the City was contacted by King County and provided with new data relative to assessed valuation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila has considered the City's anticipated financial requirements for 2010 and the amounts necessary and available to be raised by ad valorem taxes on real, personal and utility property; and WHEREAS, the final assessed valuation calculation has been determined; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Regular Tax Levy. A. There shall be and hereby is levied on all real, personal and utility property in the City of Tukwila, in King County, whose estimated assessed valuation is $4,965,087,948, $4,973,984,133, current taxes for the ensuing year commencing January 2010, in the amount and at the rates specified below: Regular Tax Levy Rate Amount $22 00 $2.67 $13,236.301 B. The said taxes herein provided for are levied for the purpose of payment upon the general bonded indebtedness of the City of Tukwila, the General Fund, and for the maintenance of the departments of the municipal government of the City of Tukwila for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2010. Section 2. Collection. This ordinance shall be certified to the proper County officials, as provided by law, and taxes here levied shall be collected to pay to the Finance Director of the City of Tukwila at the time and in the manner provided by the laws of the State of Washington for the collection of taxes for non chartered code cities. Section 3. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2262 is hereby repealed. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force and effect January 1, 2010. W \Word Processing\ Ordinances General Tax Levy 2009_STRIKETHRU.doc SH:ksn 12/08/2009 Page 1 of 2 7 8 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009 ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney W \Word Processing\ Ordinances General Tax Levy 2009.doc SH:ksn 12/08/2009 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Page 2 of 2 PRELIMINARY LEVY LIMIT WORKSHEET 2010 Tax Roll TAXING DISTRICT: City of Tukwila The following determination of your regular levy limit for 2010 property taxes is provided by the King County Assessor pursuant to RCW 84.55.100. Annexed to Library District Using Limit Factor For District 12,271,731 1.0100 12,394,448 j 24,856,302 0 24, 856,302 2.37324 58,990 12,453,438 0 12,453,438 4,964,257,830 2 50862 0 0 0 12,453,438 12,453,438 24,819 12,478,257 12,478,257 2.51362 12,283,197 111,251 0.91% 12/09/09 9:32 AM LevyLimitWS.doc (Note 1) Estimated Library rate: 0.41972 Calculation of Limit Factor Levy Levy basis for calculation: (2009 Limit Factor) (Note 2) x Limit Factor Levy Local new construction Increase in utility value (Note 3) Total new construction x Last year's regular levy rate New construction levy Total Limit Factor Levy Annexation Levy Omitted assessment levy (Note 4) Total Limit Factor Levy new lid lifts Regular levy assessed value less annexations Annexation rate (cannot exceed statutory maximum rate) x Annexation assessed value Annexation Levy Lid lifts, Refunds and Total First year lid lifts Limit Factor Levy Total RCW 84.55 levy Relevy for prior year refunds (Note 5) Total RCW 84.55 levy refunds Levy Correction: Year of Error +or ALLOWABLE LEVY (Note 6) Increase Information (Note 7) Levy rate based on allowable levy Last year's ACTUAL regular levy Dollar increase over last year other than N/C Annex Percent increase over last year other than N/C Annex Calculation of statutory levy Regular levy assessed value (Note 8) x Maximum statutory rate Maximum statutory levy +Omitted assessments levy Maximum statutory levy Limit factor needed for statutory levy ALL YEARS SHOWN ON THIS FORM ARE THE YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX IS PAYABLE. Please read carefully the notes on the reverse side. O c Using Implicit Price Deflator 12,271,731 0.9915 12,167,421 24,856,302 0 24,856,302 2.37324 58,990 12,226,411 0 12,226,411 4,964,257,830 2 46289 0 0 0 12,226,411 12,226,411 24,819 12,251,230 12,251,230 I 2.46789 12,283,197 115,776 -0.94% 4,964,257,830 3.18028 15,787,730 0 15,787,730 Not usable 9 1 0 LEVY LIMIT WORKSHEET 2010 Tax Roll TAXING DISTRICT: City of Tukwila The following determination of your regular levy limit for 2010 property taxes is provided by the King County Assessor pursuant to RCW 84.55.100. Annexed to Library District Using Limit Factor For District 12,271,731 1.0100 12,394,448 341,888,573 2,380,741 344,269,314 2.37324 817,034 13,211,482 0 13,211,482 4,973,984,133 2 65612 12/09/09 9:33 AM LevyLimitWS.doc 0 0 0 13,211,482 13,211,482 24,819 13,236,301 13,236,301 2.66111 12,283,197 111,251 0.91% (Note 1) Estimated Library rate: 0.42185 Calculation of Limit Factor Levy Levy basis for calculation: (2009 Limit Factor) (Note 2) x Limit Factor Levy Local new construction Increase in utility value (Note 3) Total new construction x Last year's regular levy rate New construction levy Total Limit Factor Levy Annexation Levy Omitted assessment levy (Note 4) Total Limit Factor Levy new lid lifts Regular levy assessed value less annexations Annexation rate (cannot exceed statutory maximum rate) x Annexation assessed value Annexation Levy Lid lifts, Refunds and Total First year lid lifts Limit Factor Levy Total RCW 84.55 levy Relevy for prior year refunds (Note 5) Total RCW 84.55 levy refunds Levy Correction: Year of Error +or ALLOWABLE LEVY (Note 6) Increase Information (Note 7) Levy rate based on allowable levy Last year's ACTUAL regular levy Dollar increase over last year other than N/C Annex Percent increase over last year other than N/C Annex Calculation of statutory levy Regular levy assessed value (Note 8) x Maximum statutory rate Maximum statutory levy +Omitted assessments levy Maximum statutory levy Limit factor needed for statutory levy ALL YEARS SHOWN ON THIS FORM ARE THE YEARS IN WHICH THE TAX IS PAYABLE. Please read carefully the notes on the reverse side. Using Implicit Price Deflator 12,271,731 0.9915 12,167,421 341, 888, 573 2,380,741 344, 269, 314 2.37324 817,034 12,984,455 0 12,984,455 4,973,984,133 2.61047 0 0 0 12,984,455 12,984,455 24,819 13, 009, 274 13,009,274 2.61546 12,283,197 115,776 -0.94% 4,973,984,133 3.17815 15,808,068 0 15,808,068 Not usable Shawn Hunstock RE: Final Levy Limit Worksheets From: To: Date: Subject: Attachments: This is it! What a difference in new construction! Hazel J. Gantz Business and Finance Officer II Lery A dministration (206) 296-5145 From: Shawn Hunstock [ma ilto:shunstock@ci.t ukwila.wa.us] Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 5:53 AM To: Gantz, Hazel Subject: Re: Final Levy Limit Worksheets Hi Hazel Did this come out yesterday and I just missed it? Shawn Shawn Hunstock, CPA Interim City Administrator, and Finance Director City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 -2544 Phone: 206-433-1838 Cell: 206 571 -5110 Fax: 206-433-1833 shunstockaci.tukwila.wa.us Gantz, Hazel" "Shawn Hunstock" 12/04/2009 1:16 PM RE: Final Levy Limit Worksheets Gantz, Hazel" <Hazel.Gantz @kingcounty.gov> 12/02/2009 5:37 P M Page 1 of 2 file: /C: \Documents and Settings \Shawn- H.TUKWILA \Local Settings \Temp \XPgrpwise 12/09/2009 11 Page 2 of 2 We have received the state utility value, however, there was a glitch in our mainframe reports that are used to calculate the levy limit worksheets This glitch has prevented me from producing the worksheets and I will not have a clean report until Friday morning, so I will be in on Friday to complete the worksheets and send them to you. I have no control over the deadline for property tax requests, therefore please send in your preliminary estimate by Friday if you have not already clone so. Please be assured that I will contact districts with any and all questions regarding your preliminary requests versus the allowable levy that will be displayed on the final worksheets. I am terribly sorry for this inconvenience. Thanks for your patience and understanding. Hazel J. Gantt Business and Finance Ojflcer 11 Levy Administration (206) 296 -5145 file: /C: \Documents and Settings \Shawn- H.TUKWILA \Local Settings \Temp \XPgrpwise 12/09/2009 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS �IILA 0 .q Initials ITEM No. k 44:5, Initials Meeting Date Prepared by 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review COLD 1. .1 06/08/09 I LV 1 06/15/09 I LV 1 I k i n 12/14/09 I LV 1 7 1 �.�=t�Y1/ 22—C, C< 2901 I 1 I D ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 09-076 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: JUNE 8, 2009 AGENDA I'lV.M TITLE An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Tukwila, Washington annexing approximately 259 acres of real property known as the "Tukwila South Project property" CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 06/08/09 Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW/ SPONSOR'S The Tukwila South Project includes annexing 259 acres into the City from King County. A SUMMARY public hearing was held June 8 and 15, 2009 and Ordinance 2241 was adopted. The Boundary Review Board approved the annexation on November 20, 2009. The ordinance under consideration now completes the annexation process; Council is asked to deliberate and move the item forward to the Special Meeting on December 14. If the annexation is not completed by the end of 2009, the Tukwila South Development Agreement terminates. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planting Comm. DAI'E: Tukwila South Project No Committee Review RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Mayor recommends approval COMMITTEE COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 06/08/09 Forward to 6/15/09 Regular Meeting 06/15/09 Adopted Ordinance #2241 12/14/09 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 06/08/09 Informational Memorandum date 06/08/09 Ordinance in draft form 06/15/09 Ordinance in final form 12/14/09 Informational Memorandum dated 12/14/09 Ordinance in final form 1 3 14 City of Tukwila TO: Mayor Haggerton City Council FROM: Lisa Verner, Project Manager DATE: December 14, 2009 SUBJECT: Tukwila South Project Annexation ISSUE BACKGROUND INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Jim Haggerton, Mayor Annex the portion of the Tukwila South Project property (259 acres) in King County into the City of Tukwila as part of the overall Tukwila South Project approvals. The first part of the annexation process was completed in 2005; the second part was completed in June, 2009; the final part will be completed now. On November 12, 2004, a Request for Annexation was received from La Pianta LLC. The Request was signed by owners of 10% of the value of the property included in the request. Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120, the City Council set a date, no more than sixty (60) days after the filing of this request, for a meeting with the signers to determine whether the Council would accept, reject or modify the proposed annexation and resolve other issues as required by state law. This Regular Meeting was held on January 18, 2005. The Council unanimously voted to accept the 10% Request as submitted, to authorize the circulation of the Petition for Annexation (60% Petition), and to require the following: 1. the simultaneous adoption of zoning regulations; and 2. the assumption of a proportionate share of existing city indebtedness by the area to be annexed. The Petition was signed and submitted by La Pianta representatives upon Council approval of the Tukwila South Development Agreement and related land use issues (June 8, 2009). On June 15, 2009, Council adopted Ordinance 2241 annexing the Tukwila South property subject to Boundary Review Board approval. The Notice of Intention to Annex was submitted by the City to the Washington State Boundary Review Board (BRB) for King County with a request for public hearing. The BRB held a public hearing on October 20, 2009; at the close of the hearing Board members directed staff to prepare a motion to approve the annexation. At its regular meeting on November 12, 2009, the BRB voted unanimously to approve the Tukwila South Annexation. To conclude the process, the City Council must now adopt a final ordinance annexing the property and setting an effective date. The effective date in the Ordinance before Council is December 31, 2009. This date has been coordinated with the various King County departments that need to 15 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 transfer the annexed property. This date also meets the timeline laid out in the Development Agreement. RECOMMENDATION The Council is asked to deliberate on this annexation ordinance at the December 14, 2009 Committee of the Whole meeting and to forward it to the December 14, 2009 Special Meeting for adoption. ATTACHMENTS Ordinance annexing the Tukwila South Project property 1 6 W InfoMemosITSAnnexl2-14- 09.doc City of 'Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ANNEXING APPROXIMATELY 259 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE "TUKWILA SOUTH PROJECT PROPERTY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, RCW 35A.14.120 provides that "proceedings for initiating annexation of unincorporated territory to a charter code city or non charter code city may be commenced by the filing of a petition of property owners of the territory proposed to be annexed," but that "prior to the circulation of a petition for annexation, the initiating party or parties, who shall be the owners of not less than ten percent in value, according to the assessed valuation for general taxation of the property for which annexation is sought, shall notify the legislative body of the code city in writing of their intention to commence annexation proceedings;" and WHEREAS, La Pianta, LLC is the owner of approximately 259 acres of real property known as the "Tukwila South Project Property;" and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2004, La Pianta, LLC submitted a Request for Annexation "Request which was signed by owners of not less than ten percent of the value of the property included in the Request; and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2005, the City Council met with the initiating parties as part of its regular City Council meeting pursuant to RCW 35A.14.120; and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2005, the City Council unanimously voted to accept the Request and to authorize the initiating parties to circulate the Petition for Annexation seeking the signatures of the owners of sixty percent of the assessed valuation of property within the proposed annexation "Petition on the following conditions: 1) that zoning regulations are simultaneously adopted, and 2) Petition signers consent to the assumption of the proposed annexation area's proportionate share of existing city indebtedness, if any; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2009, during its Committee of the Whole meeting, the Tukwila City Council held a public hearing following publication of proper notice thereof as provided in RCW 35A.14.130; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 2009, during a Special meeting, the City Council approved the related Tukwila South Development Agreement and other related land use issues and La Pianta, LLC submitted its signed Petition; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council desires to annex the area described and shown in the Petition and on June 15, 2009 adopted Ordinance No. 2241 annexing the area subject to Washington State Boundary Review Board of King County approval; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Boundary Review Board of King County held a public hearing on October 20, 2009 and approved the Resolution and Hearing Decision for File No. 2304, City of Tukwila, Tukwila South Annexation, at its regular meeting of November 12, 2009; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Annexation. The City of Tukwila hereby annexes the Tukwila South Property, which is legally described in Exhibit A and depicted on the map in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 2. Conditions Upon Annexation. A. Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline Master Plan and Zoning Designations. The Tukwila South Property shall be subject to the Comprehensive Plan, Master Plan and Shoreline Master Plan map amendment to designate the property as Urban Environment and Tukwila South Overlay District subject to zoning regulations as set forth in the Tukwila South Project Development Agreement adopted on June 8, 2009 W \Word Processing\ Ordinances \Tukwila South Project Property Annexation.doc LV:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 1 of 2 17 1 B. Assumption of Existing Indebtedness. The Tukwila South Property shall be assessed and taxed at the same rate and on the same basis as the property in the City of Tukwila is assessed and taxed to pay for the portion of outstanding city indebtedness, if any, which indebtedness has been approved by the voters, contracted for or incurred prior to or existing at the effective date of the annexation in Section 1 of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date of Annexation. The effective date of the Tukwila South Annexation shall be December 31, 2009. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be m full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law Section 5. Certification of Ordinance to King County. Upon passage the City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance with the King County Council, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.140. Section 6. Severability. Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid for any reason or should any portion of this ordinance be pre empted by state or federal law or regulation, such decision or pre emption shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to other persons or circumstances. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY Office of the City Attomey Attachments: Exhibit A Tukwila South Property legal description Exhibit B Area Map W Word Processing Ordinances \Tukwila South Project Property Annexation.doc LV:ksn 12/09/2009 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Page 2 of 2 Exhibit A Legal Description of Tukwila South Annexation 'Those portions of Section 35, Township 23 North, Range 4 E. Willamette Meridian; Section 2, Township 22 North, Range 4 E. Willamette Meridian; and Section 3, Township 22 North, Range 4 E. Willamette Meridian, lying south of the City of Tukwila corporate limits as established by the City of Tukwila Ordinances 1125, 472, 269, and 696; East of the east right -of -way margin of Interstate Highway 5; East of the west right -of -way margin of Orillia Road South; North of the north right -of -way margin of South 204th Street and west of the City of Kent Ordinances 2114 and 2351; Together with: That portion of South 204th Street Tying north of and immediately adjacent to the north line of the City of Kent corporate limits as established by City of Kent Ordinance 1727, and westerly of the thread of the Green River." 19 o VCNTY MAP a DENOTES ANNEXATION BOU D Y1 DENOTES PAA BOUNDARY 1 EXHIBIT B L COUNCIL A GENDA SYNOPSIS ILA C .1i, Initials ITEMNO. ,s ,n Meeting Date Prepared by Mayyr s revzew Council rertzew V C B�" —1 12/14/09 1 SH 1� 1 90= I I II I sod-' 3-a I ITEM INFORMATION I CAS NUMBER: 09-179 I ORIGINAL DA1'1~;: DECEMBER 14, 2009 AGENDA ITEM TPfLE A resolution of support for the Tukwila School District technology levy, to be presented to voters on the February 9, 2010 ballot. CATEGORY Dzscusszon Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date (SPONSOR Conn& Mayor Adm Svcs DCD N Fire P &R Police PW SPONSOR'S The resolution expresses the City Council's support of the Tukwila School District SUMMARY technology bond levy to be presented to voters on the February 9, 2010 ballot. The District has asked for the resolution to be completed by the end of December. The Council is being asked to approve the resolution of support. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DA 12/14/09 RFC OMMFNnATIONS SPONSOR /ADMIN. Finance Department COMMITTEE Unanimous consent; Forward to Special Meeting COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 12/14/09 1 MTG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS 12/14/09 1 Informational Memorandum dated 12/09/09 Resolution School Technology Levy Election Information Sheet (Tukwila School District) 21 22 TO: FROM: Shawn Hunstock, Interim City Administrator DATE: December 9, 2009 SUBJECT: Tukwila School District Bond Levy ISSUE Representatives from the Tukwila School District have asked for the City's support of its technology levy, to be presented to voters on the February 9, 2010 ballot. BACKGROUND City of Tukwila INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Haggerton Community Affairs and Parks Committee City Council The Tukwila School District commissioned an audit, conducted by the Puget Sound Educational Service District (ESD), of its technology policy, planning, equipment and usage throughout the District. The audit resulted in a number of recommendations by ESD which were evaluated by a District technology study committee comprised of representatives from the community, businesses, parents, school board members, District administration, teachers and other District staff. The committee presented a technology vision statement to the board, which was approved on September 22, 2009. The vision statement includes the following objectives for use of technology throughout the District: Prepare students to successfully compete for jobs in the local and global market place, Use data to support decision making throughout the District to ensure that they are doing what works for their students, Motivate students to learn, More deeply engage the parents and community in the teaching and learning. Specific recommendations from the technology audit include the following: Establish a process of consistent, sustainable and equitable implementation of technology across the District. Upgrade their communications infrastructure to enable their students and staff to take full advantage of the instructional resources available on the internet. Equip their classrooms with modern 21 century technology for teaching and learning. Provide ongoing professional development to their staff members so that they can employ new technology to achieve the greatest benefits for their students. Jim Haggerton, Mayor 23 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 Adequately support their technology support department so that the technology is reliable and functional at all times. Provide instruction and instructional support applications to maximize student learning. Greatly increase the access to high quality educational interactions with technology for all their students. DISCUSSION The School District has asked for the City's support of its technology levy. This item will be presented to voters on the February 9, 2010 ballot. The Mayor recommends support of the technology levy ballot measure as it is in the best interests of the residents of Tukwila to improve and maintain the skills that are necessary to compete in the regional and global marketplace. The City's economy relies upon the availability of such highly skilled workers. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve the resolution supporting the Tukwila School District's technology levy, to be presented to voters on February 9, 2010. This item is scheduled to be discussed at the December 14, 2009, Community Affairs and Parks committee meeting, and the Committee of the Whole and Special Council meeting the same evening. ATTACHMENT Resolution School Technology Levy Election Information Sheet (TSD) 2 4 W:12009 InfoMemos\TechnologyLevy.docx City of Tukwila Washington Resolution No. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, SUPPORTING THE TUKWILA SCHOOL DISTRICT'S TECHNOLOGY CAPITAL LEVY ON THE FEBRUARY 9, 2010 BALLOT. WHEREAS, residents of Tukwila will vote for a technology levy on the February 9, 2010 ballot; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila School District is the only school district in the metropolitan Seattle area that has not approved a bond or levy for technology in its schools; and WHEREAS, Tukwila students are at a disadvantage when they graduate and must compete with graduates of surrounding school districts for advancement in further education and employment; and WHEREAS, technology is an integral part of most post -high- school education, training and jobs; and WHEREAS, computers and technology help motivate students to learn, and WHEREAS, the technology levy will provide computers and technology in all of the schools in the Tukwila School District, as well as infrastructure improvements such as wireless connectivity and staff training; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes that technology in education prepares students for further education and jobs in local businesses; and WHEREAS, the opportunity for public statements and comments was afforded by the City Council in accordance with RCW 42.17.130; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: The City Council of the City of Tukwila expresses its support of the Tukwila School District technology levy and urges all voters to support the school technology levy issue on the February 9, 2010 ballot. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009. ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney W'\Word Processing\Resolutions \Tukwila School District Levy.doc KF:ksn 12/8/2009 Joan Hernandez, Council President Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Page 1 of 1 25 26 FEBRUARY 9, 2010 SCHOOL TECHNOLOGY LEVY ELECTION INFORMATION SHEET The Tukwila Board of Directors approved a Technology Levy that will be presented to the voters on February 9, 2010. Technology Levy dollars will enable the District to modernize existing school facilities by acquiring and installing instructional technology equipment, infrastructure, and systems to improve student learning and make health, safety and energy efficiency improvements. Funds will support professional development to train teachers to use technology to engage students and, in turn, provide students with tools they need to successfully compete in a challenging world and job market. Because technology is not included in the State's definition of basic education virtually all funds for school technology and training must come from local levies. All school districts in King County except two have passed Technology Levies. This is the first Technology Levy presented to Tukwila voters. This levy addresses four main cost areas: First -rate quality infrastructure to support classrooms (26 21 century classroom hardware and software (38 Instructional Technology Coaches (15 Training (5 Health, safety and energy efficiency improvements. (16 This measure enables the District to go forward with its technology plan which was first submitted to the state in 2007 and to implement recommendations made in a 2009 technology audit of the District by the Puget Sound Educational Service District. The District's fifteen- person Technology Advisory Committee recommended a six -year levy collecting an average of $1.05 million dollars per year. Estimated rates and collections are below: Collection Year Approximate Levy Rate /$1,000 Assessed Value 2011 $0.44 2012 $0.42 2013 $0.27 2014 $0.26 2015 $0.25 2016 $0.24 Amount $1,350,000 $1,350,000 $896,250 $896,250 $896,250 $896,250 *The first two years include $500,000 for general building maintenance funding related to health, safety and energy efficiency improvements. 27 28 Imnortant Note: This is an all mail election. Registered voters will receive a ballot in the mail. All ballots must be returned and postmarked by or before February 9, 2010. Voting places will not be open and voting in person will not be an option. Tax Exemption: Some senior citizens and disabled persons may qualify for exemptions from all or part of this levy. Details and forms are available from: King County Department of Assessments 500 Fourth Avenue Suite ADM -AS -0708 Seattle, WA 98104 TEL: 206 296 -7300 For more information about the Tukwila Technology Levy contact your neighborhood school, or the Tukwila School District Office at 206.901.8000 or at its website www.tukwila.wednet.edu. COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS ILA ►,ti, c0 qs Inztzals ITEM NO. y Meetznq Date 1 Prepared by 1 Maygr'r review Council'rbpzew -91 1 12/14/09 1 KAM 1 I Gvu_) 5 D S I K '-':4 Xj, V, 2901 I I I S E 3, .A ITEM INFORMATION 1 CAS NUMBER: 09-180 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DA 11.: DECEMBER 14, 2009 AGENDA ITEM TITLE A resolution thanking Pamela Linder for her 14 years of service as a Tukwila Councilmember. CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resalutton Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 1S1 Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&'R Police PTV SPONSOR'S Presentation of a resolution thanking Pamela Linder for 14 years of service as City of SUMMARY Tukwila Councilmember. RI ;MEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. 111 Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Council President COMMITTEE COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 12/14/09 1 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 12/14/09 Resolution in final form 1 I 29 30 City of Tukwila Washington Resolution No. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, EXPRESSING SINCERE GRATITUDE TO PAMELA LINDER FOR HER SERVICE AS A COUNCILMEMBER. WHEREAS, Pamela Linder was elected to the Tukwila City Council in 1995 to serve a two -year term. She was then re- elected and ultimately served three consecutive four -year terms as a Councilmember; and WHEREAS, she has chaired several Council Committees; served as Council President in 1998 and 2005; and has dedicated countless hours of service not only to the community, but to outside boards and committees as a representative of the City of Tukwila, and WHEREAS, Pamela has represented the interests of Tukwila residents and business members through her involvement in the Southwest King County Economic Development Initiative; Tukwila International Boulevard Action Committee (formerly Highway 99 Action Committee); Ambassador for the Southwest King County Chamber of Commerce; Southcenter Rotary Club; Hotel /Motel Lodging Tax Advisory Board, Duwamish Improvement Club; and the Foster Community Club; and WHEREAS, in addition to her dedication to the residential and business communities, Pamela's self- described "true north" is her garden and her love for backyard wildlife habitats. She was instrumental in Tukwila's certification as a Community Wildlife Habitat, the formation of Tukwila's Annual Backyard Wildlife Fair, and the creation and construction of the Macadam Winter Garden Park. Her own backyard has been recognized by the National Wildlife Foundation as a certified Backyard Wildlife Habitat; and WHEREAS, Pamela's passion for her community and its members is evident in her ongoing, long- standing relationships with a variety of community groups, as well as government and business associates. She has consistently listened, responded and assisted citizens in addressing their interests in a caring and capable manner; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: On behalf of the citizens of Tukwila, the Mayor and Councilmembers express their sincere thanks to Pamela Linder for her 14 years of dedicated service as a City of Tukwila Councilmember. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this 14th day of December, 2009. Jim Haggerton, Mayor Joan Hernandez, Council President ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Joe Duffie Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk Dennis Robertson APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Verna Griffin Office of the City Attorney Kathy Hougardy De'Sean Quinn Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: 31 32 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS �J�� IAA I I'q Initials ITEM NO. Z Meeting Date Prepared by 1 Mayor' review 1 Counczl review k 11/23/09 1 JP 1 I om tc 1 SP I n 12/07/09 I JP I 1/ 1 1 12/14/09 I ]P I I I j ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 09-170 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE. NOVEMBER 23, 2009 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Four ordinances adopting a new Shoreline Master Program, revisions to Comprehensive Plan policies on the shoreline, a new shoreline overlay disctrict, TMC 18.44 to replace the existing 18.44, and new definitions to be added to TMC 18.06. CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Date 11/23 12/7 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 12/14/09 Mtg Date Mtg Date 4/20/09, Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Ma Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S The council has held ten work sessions over the past five months to consider the Planning SUMMARY Commission recommended Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The Council has made revisions to this draft which are reflected in the revised SMP, the revised Comprehensive Plan policies, a new TMC 18.44, the Shoreline Overlay district of the Zoning Code, and new or revised definitions to be added to TMC 18.06. The Council is being asked to consider and approve these ordinances and the new Shoreline Master Program. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DAZE: 10 work sessions over the past 5 months, concluding 11/17/09 RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development COMMITTEE Ten Council work sessions to review SMP 7/07/09 11/17/09 COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 07/24/08 Joint City Council /Planning Commission briefing on staff recommended SMP 03/23/09 Committee of the Whole briefing on Planning Commission recommended Draft SMP 04/20/09 Public Hearing 11/23/09 Forward to December 7 Regular Meeting for continued discussion MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/23/09 Informational Memorandum dated 11/19/09 Four SMP Ordinances, attachments and draft Cumulative Impacts Analysis I 12/7/09 Informational Memorandum dated 12/02/09 Ordinance #1 and revised pages from Shoreline Master Program Ordinance #2 and revised Comprehensive Plan policies Revised Ordinance #3 and matrix identifying and explaining changes Summary of Comments received at November 23 C.O.W., per Council request 12/14/09 Informational Memorandum dated wi to attached Lumu f ti ve impacts 3 3 Analysis and 4 Ordinances in final form 34 ISSUE BACKGROUND DISCUSSION City of Tukwila INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Jim Haggerton, Mayor TO: TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL FROM: Carol Lumb, Senior Planner DATE: December 10, 2009 SUBJECT: Shoreline Master Program Ordinances and Cumulative Impacts Analysis Attached you will find four ordinances related to adoption of the City's Shoreline Master Program and the Cumulative Impacts Analysis required by the Department of Ecology. The Council provided direction on revisions to three of the ordinances at its meeting on December 7, 2009 which are reflected in the materials in your packet and discussed below. There were no revisions to the fourth ordinance, adopting new definitions for TMC 18.06, the definitions chapter of the Zoning Code. Review of the Draft Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update began on July 24, 2008 with a joint City Council /Planning Commission briefing on the major aspects of the proposed program. The Planning Commission then met over a period of six months during which it reviewed the document in detail, held three Open Houses and conducted a public hearing on August 2, 2008 that was continued to October 9, 2008 to allow additional time for public review and comment of the document. The Planning Commission approved a Shoreline Master Program on February 5, 2009 and forwarded it to the Council for its review. Another Open House was held on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 for interested parties to obtain information about the Planning Commission Recommended Shoreline Master Program. The City Council was briefed on the Planning Commission Recommended Draft SMP March 23, 2009 and then met from July 7, 2009 to November 17, 2009 for a total of ten work sessions to review the Planning Commission Recommended SMP. The work sessions were concluded on November 17, 2009 and staff was directed to prepare ordinances to adopt and implement a new shoreline master program. The Council reviewed four draft ordinances at the Committee of the Whole meeting on November 23, 2009 and also heard public comments on the SMP at this meeting. The Council continued its review of the ordinances at its meeting on December 7, 2009. At both meetings the Council provided direction to staff on revisions to make to the ordinances. Over the past six months, Councilmembers have also met with staff and the City Attorney to discuss various issues related to the shoreline. The four ordinances are attached and reflect direction provided by the Council to staff to -date as follows: Ordinance #1 is the ordinance adopting the Shoreline Master Program. Attached to this ordinance are the pages from the SMP that have been revised as a result of Council action on 11/23/09 and 12/7/09. The changes discussed at the 12/7/09 meeting have been accepted the only revisions (shown in strikeout/underline) relate to Sections 8.2 1.h, 8.3 1.h, and 8.4 1.h. to correct the reference to the levee regulations and in Section 14.5, A. 7. revisions provided by 35 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 City Attorney Bob Sterbank. No revisions were made to the ordinance text at either the 11/23/09 or 12/7/09 meeting. Ordinance #2 is the ordinance that adopts revisions to the Shoreline Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Attached to the ordinance are the policies from the Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Element with the changes directed at the 12/7/09 meeting accepted. No revisions were made to the ordinance text at either the 11/23/09 or 12/7/09 meeting. Ordinance #3 is the ordinance that adopts shoreline regulations (it will become the new Shoreline Overlay District and replace the current TMC 18.44). The revised ordinance is attached. The revisions are found in: 1) 18.44.130 E. 2.g., and 3. as presented by City Attorney Bob Sterbank at the 12/7/09 meeting and 2) in 18.44.130 E. 4 correcting the permit process to be used for time extension requests. Ordinance #4 is the ordinance that adopts new definitions to be added to TMC 18.06, the definition section of the Zoning Code. No revisions have been made to this ordinance. The Council will have an opportunity to hear from interested individuals again at the Special Meeting on December 14, 2009 and will have an opportunity make further changes to the ordinances. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve the four ordinances and the respective attachments adopting a new Shoreline Master Program for the City, revised Comprehensive Plan shoreline policies and shoreline regulations and definitions. The ordinances were first considered at the Committee of the Whole meeting on November 23, 2009, and at the Regular Council meeting on December 7, 2009. Attachments: Cumulative Impacts Analysis Ordinance #1 and attached revised pages from the Shoreline Master Program Ordinance #2 and revised Comprehensive Plan policies Ordinance #3 revised Ordinance #4 shoreline definitions 36 W12009 InfoMemos \SMP12- 14- 09.doc CITY OF TUKWILA SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Cumulative Impacts Analysis Prepared for: City of Tukwila Revised December 2009 37 38 Introduction With the assistance of a grant from the Department of Ecology, the City of Tukwila is updating its Shoreline Master Program (SMP) consistent with state guidelines (WAC Chapter 173 -26). Under the shoreline guidelines, local jurisdictions are required to evaluate and consider cumulative impacts of reasonably foreseeable future development in the shorelines of the state (WAC 173- 26- 186(8)(d)). This report assesses the cumulative impacts of development and activities in the shoreline over time under the proposed amendments to the City of Tukwila SMP and was prepared as a grant deliverable (SMA Grant No. G0600234, Task 9). At this point in time, the proposed SMP has been reviewed by Department of Ecology (a staff draft and the Planning Commission Recommended Draft SMP), the Planning Commission, and the Tukwila City Council, and Tukwila staff has made revisions to the draft as a result of the comments received and discussions carried out with the review entities. Accordingly, this analysis should be considered the final version, evaluating the proposed SMP dated December 2009. This version of the SMP is expected to be locally adopted before the end of the year and forwarded to Ecology for formal review and approval in early 2010. For the City of Tukwila, shorelines of the state in the city limits and Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) include approximately 13.6 river miles of the Green/Duwamish River, between approximately river mile (RM) 17.3 and RM 3.7. The Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila is designated as a "shoreline of statewide significance," having a mean annual flow greater than 1,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). The purpose of evaluating cumulative impacts is to insure that, when implemented over time, the proposed SMP goals, policies and regulations will achieve "no net loss" of shoreline ecological functions from current "baseline" conditions. Baseline conditions are identified and described in the Final Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (May 2007); Appendix A to the proposed SMP. The proposed SMP provides standards and procedures to evaluate individual uses or developments for their potential to impact shoreline resources on a case -by -case basis through the permitting process. The purpose of this memorandum is to determine if impacts to shoreline ecological functions are likely to result from the aggregate of activities and developments in the shoreline that take place over time. The state guidelines establish that, "to ensure no net loss of ecological functions and protection of other shoreline functions and/or uses, master programs shall contain policies, programs, and regulations that address adverse cumulative impacts and fairly allocate the burden of addressing cumulative impacts among development opportunities. Evaluation of such cumulative impacts should consider: Current circumstances affecting the shorelines and relevant natural processes; Reasonably foreseeable future development and use of the shoreline; and Beneficial effects of any established regulatory programs under other local, state, and federal laws. This cumulative impacts assessment uses these three considerations as a framework for evaluating the potential long -term impacts on shoreline ecological functions and processes that may result from development or activities under the proposed SMP over time. 1 WAC 173- 26- 286(8)(d) 1 39 40 Current Circumstances As part of the City's SMP update, an Inventory and Characterization Report and Map Folio was prepared in December 2006, and was finalized in the spring of 2007 following technical review by Ecology and King County. The final report and map folio is included as Appendix A to the proposed SMP. The inventory and characterization report identifies existing conditions and evaluates the ecological functions and processes in the City's shoreline jurisdiction. The inventory included a characterization of ecosystem processes functioning at a watershed scale, as well as an inventory and assessment of conditions in all shoreline areas within the City of Tukwila and its Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) (shown below as the "shoreline planning area The term "shoreline planning area" refers to the approximate area within the City's shoreline jurisdiction, or areas subject to SMP regulations, as shown in Figure 1. The following sections summarize baseline conditions, or current circumstances, with regard to Tukwila's shorelines. Watershed Context and Shoreline Modifications The City of Tukwila is situated in the Puget Sound Lowlands at the transition from the fresh water Green River to the tidally influenced Duwamish estuary ecosystem. Tukwila includes approximately 12.5 miles of the Green/Duwamish River. The Green River basin is part of the Green/Duwamish Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA 9). Historically, the Green/Duwamish River drained a significantly larger area than it does today. River course changes and major engineering projects in the early part of the 20 century resulted in both the White and Cedar Rivers being diverted to neighboring basins. As a result, the overall freshwater discharge in the Green/Duwamish River has been reduced to approximately one -third of the pre- diversion era. The Green/Duwamish has undergone extensive modifications as part of past river management with the intent of reducing channel migration and limiting the extent and duration of valley flooding. Levees and/or revetments have been constructed along the majority of the Green/Duwamish River through the City of Tukwila to increase bank strength and reduce flooding. In addition, flows within the Green/Duwamish River have been significantly modified by the construction of the Howard A. Hanson Dam and installation of water diversions. These modifications have significantly reduced the severity of floods that historically covered much of the valley bottom. The condition of the current system of levees and revetments is a growing source of concern for King County and the cities involved, as many of the levees are aging and would not meet current standards for either flood conveyance or stability. 2 SeaTac international Airport r �i f r i L .0 1 3 1 Map 2 Shoreline Planning Area Legend Tukwila City Limits River Miles Shoreline Planning Area Potentential Annexation Areas t_ Reach Areas L' 1 r 14ti I Figure 1. City of Tukwila Green Duwamish Shoreline Planning Area 41 42 Biological Resources and Shoreline Functions The Green/Duwamish River within the City of Tukwila provides important habitat for several species of salmonids and other listed fish, as well as a few wildlife species, such as osprey. The entire length of the GreenlDuwamish River within the City of Tukwila has been declared "critical habitat" for the Chinook salmon and bull trout and both species are listed as threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act. The aquatic environment within the channel is an important corridor, particularly in the transition zone from the freshwater riverine environment to tidal estuarine environment of Elliot Bay. Almost every species of anadromous fish migrates through this transition zone, making it important for providing habitat functions. The transition area generally extends from the East Marginal Way South Bridge to the city's northern limits. The transition zone has effectively been pushed upstream from its historic location due to: (1) a significant reduction (70 of fresh water flowing into the Duwamish estuary (owing to the diversion of the White and Cedar/Black Rivers), (2) channel dredging, and (3) reduction of flows as a result of the Howard A. Hanson dam. The establishment of heavy industrial uses in the transition zone has replaced wetlands and natural riparian areas with impervious surfaces, and the river banks have been replaced by armoring, eliminating edge habitat which slows flows and creating unrestrained rapid downstream flows. Spatial structure, residence time, and the habitat available for fish refugia and rearing functions in the Duwamish estuary have therefore been reduced and constrained. High densities of fish have been observed utilizing what is left of this specific habitat. At the watershed scale, overall increases in salmonid survival rates are dependent on the availability of sufficient transition zone habitat to accommodate fish while they adjust from fresh to salt water (WRIA 9 Steering Committee, 2005). Modifications to the river system have resulted in reduced levels of ecosystem functioning in the other reaches of the river flowing through Tukwila, including hydrology, water quality, riparian habitat, and in- stream habitat. Changes to hydrology focus on modified flow regime due to dam construction, diversion, and urban development. River management and levees have reduced the connection between the rivers and their floodplains, changing the spatial extent of habitats, and increasing the potential for negative water quality impacts. Disturbances to the channel banks have resulted in areas that are dominated by non native invasive species. Wood, in the form of riparian trees and in- channel wood, is generally lacking throughout the system, which negatively impacts riparian and aquatic habitats. Land Use and Public Access The majority of the upper Green/Duwamish watershed, beyond the city limits, is in managed forestland, parkland, or designated wilderness areas. Agricultural land covers much of the upper watershed within the Green River gorge. The Kent -Auburn Valley is a transitional area between the forest and agricultural activities upstream to the highly developed residential, industrial and commercial development in the cities of Kent, Tukwila, and Seattle downstream in the Lower Green Duwamish River Valley. Within the valley, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses dominate the former Green River floodplain in the vicinity of Tukwila. South of the city, commercial and warehouse /industrial land uses dominate on the right bank in the City of Kent, with agricultural fields on the left bank within the Tukwila South potential annexation area. Commercial development is prevalent between the southern city boundary and I -405. Residential development dominates between 1 -405 and the I -5 Bridge. North of the I -5 Bridge to the Turning Basin, residential uses give way to commercial uses. The Turning Basin, located at river mile 5.8, is the approximate southern boundary of the predominantly industrial area that extends to the northern city limit. 4 There are significant public access opportunities for enjoyment and use of the Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila. A series of parks and open space areas provide recreational opportunities and the Green River Trail provides access along the river throughout much of the city, linking many shoreline parks. In addition, there are several unofficial recreational fishing sites and fishing shelters at various locations along the shoreline. Restoration Opportunities The inventory and characterization provides an assessment of shoreline functions and identifies potential conservation and restoration opportunities. As part of the SMP update process, the City also developed a Draft Shoreline Restoration Plan in February 2007. The plan report was revised in May following technical review by King County and Ecology. It was modified in 2009 to update the status of restoration projects and include some newly identified projects and is included as Appendix B to the proposed SMP. The Restoration Plan builds on the Inventory and Characterization Report and provides a framework to: Identify primary goals for ecological restoration of the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; Identify how restoration of ecological function can be accomplished; Suggest how the SMP update process may accomplish the restoration of impaired shoreline functions associated with the Green/Duwamish ecosystem; and Prioritize restoration projects so that the highest value restoration actions may be accomplished first. Past work which focused on the Green\Duwamish River (in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9) has resulted in an important collection of data used to identify potential restoration opportunities. Significant restoration activities along the Green\Duwamish River are already underway in the form of the multi agency Green River Ecosystem Restoration Project. Several restoration opportunities have been identified as part of the WRIA 9 Final Salmon Habitat Plan and the recently adopted King County Flood Hazard Management Plan. Based on the key ecosystem functions that are currently altered, there appear to be two specific types of restoration actions that will most benefit the Green/Duwamish ecosystem in Tukwila. While these projects are intended to restore many ecosystem functions, the restoration activities will occur in the highly -urban valley bottom, and as a result, cannot fully achieve pre disturbance channel conditions. In addition, some restoration actions must occur at the watershed scale, which will restore ecosystem functions that cannot be addressed solely within Tukwila. Enlarging channel cross sectional area. This action will increase flood storage, allow for more stable Levees, restore floodplain area, provide a larger intertidal zone in the important transitional area, and provide a more natural transition from aquatic to upland habitats. This action could include the use of setback levees and revetments, and the excavation of historic fill or floodplain materials to create back channels. Enhance existing habitats. This action will improve the functioning of the existing aquatic, riverine wetland, and riparian habitats that currently exist along the Green/Duwamish River. These actions could include the removal of non native invasive vegetation, installation of native riparian vegetation, and installation of LWD below ordinary high water. The Restoration Plan identifies over 20 site specific projects that are in various stages of development. The projects generally address one or both of the types of actions described above. High priority projects will 5 43 44 typically address both hydrologic and habitat ecosystem functions; have opportunity for multiple funding sources; include freshwater tributary channels; and /or not require additional property acquisition. In the context of designating shoreline environments and developing management policies and regulations, the City wants to encourage and enable restoration projects throughout the city wherever possible, with a particular focus on projects in the transition zone. Potential Use Conflicts Two key issues illustrate potential use conflicts and constraints to implementing restoration in Tukwila: 1) levee maintenance and management; and 2) existing development patterns and anticipated redevelopment. Discussion of shoreline planning for the Green/Duwamish River in Tukwila must acknowledge the fact that, in light of the existing system of levees and revetments, the City cannot act alone. There are a variety of regulatory jurisdictions outside of the City with different responsibilities for maintenance and management of the levee system, including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), King County River and Floodplain Management Unit (acting as part of the Green River Flood Control Zone District), and private property owners. The City of Tukwila Public Works Department has overall responsibility for maintenance of all levees including the federally certified levee, which extends from about the I- 405 crossing to S. 180 The actual maintenance work on the levees is contracted by the City to King County. The restoration of native tree and shrub species along the levees would increase riparian habitat and ecological functioning of this reach of the Green/Duwamish River, benefiting salmonids as well as other species. However, along the federally certified levee the Corps of Engineers (responsible for certifying the federal levee) has been requiring removal of large trees to prevent what the Corps considers destabilization of the levee caused by the root systems, potential water piping (e.g., water infiltrating into and through levees along root pathways at higher rates than it could through root free soil) at high flows, and levee failure if trees fall. For the Vegetation Free Zone of the levee, current Corps guidance only allows grass as vegetative cover on the levees (USACOE, Engineering Manual 1110 -2 -301). Current guidance also specifies a root -free zone where plantings can occur, but roots will generally not penetrate this structural zone. Therefore, under current regulations, to meet the requirements for federal levee certification, some existing vegetation will continually have to be removed to maintain the levee certification. Under the SMA, removing trees and vegetation from the riparian zone of shorelines of the state is in conflict with policies for vegetation conservation and enhancement. A possible solution is to set back and re- slope the levees to create benches where vegetation can be planted that will not interfere with the levee prism as the levee system is reconstructed to improve its stability. This would require additional easement area beyond the existing maintenance easements that have been acquired along the length of the system. The existing development pattern also represents constraints to implementing restoration projects, including levee setbacks, off channel habitat restoration, wetland and stream restoration, and riparian zone enhancements. Most of Tukwila is fully developed with a dense, urbanized land use pattern along the river bank. The City's current SMP, in place since 1974, establishes a 40 -foot setback from the mean high water line. In areas where King County's SMP still applies, a 20 to 50 foot setback is established, depending on the type of use. In many places, there is little more than this 20 to 40 -foot zone that is not intensely developed. Some places have more open space and less development and thus have greater flexibility to accommodate potential habitat restoration actions. The City's vision for future land use includes maintenance of existing urban development and further development of its urban character, particularly its identity as a regionally significant center for manufacturing, industrial, and commercial development, as well as treating the river as more of an amenity than in the past. One challenge for the City is in determining how best to accommodate new development and redevelopment near the 6 shoreline in a manner consistent with the many competing goals of the GMA and SMA and their accompanying local documents, the Comprehensive Plan and the Shoreline Master Program. Reasonable Foreseeable Future Development and Use For the purposes of the cumulative impacts analysis, this section focuses on the effects of anticipated development and use of the shoreline as envisioned in the City's Comprehensive Plan and the proposed SMP. Since the existing development pattern in Tukwila is well established and highly urbanized, the focus of this discussion is on potential redevelopment throughout much of the city. That is, there are few vacant parcels along Tukwila's shorelines and virtually no potential for large areas of undeveloped land along the shoreline to be subdivided and newly developed. One exception is the Tukwila South Potential Annexation Area, which is currently agricultural and/or undeveloped land. While this section addresses anticipated future development and redevelopment, the subsequent sections address how such development would occur under the proposed SMP. Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element is divided into several elements, including three that specifically address different geographic areas of the City: the Manufacturing/Industrial Center, Tukwila Urban Center, and Tukwila South. Additional planning efforts for these areas include master plans, planned actions, and/or strategic implementation plans. From the upstream City boundary downstream to the Black River Green River confluence within the city limits (S. 204 Street to the north boundary of Ft. Dent Park), the Comprehensive Plan designates areas along the shoreline as Tukwila Urban Center and Commercial /Light Industrial (predominantly south of I -405). North of I- 405 in this reach, designations include a mix of Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Regional Commercial Mixed Use, Commercial/Light Industrial, and Heavy Industrial. Significant portions of Low Density Residential areas within the reach's shoreline area are designated with a Public Recreation Overlay and are developed as Fort Dent Park, the Foster Golf Links and the Tukwila Community Center. Within the City's southern PAA, along the western Green River shoreline, all areas are designated as Tukwila Valley South. The Comprehensive Plan element generally envisions an extension of the commercial and industrial development on the valley floor for this area. From the Black River Green River confluence downstream to the northern city limits near the 16 Avenue S. bridge, the Comprehensive Plan designates areas along the shoreline as a mix of Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy and Low Density Residential. Other designations include Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light, Commercial/Light Industrial, and Residential Commercial Center. Tukwila Manufacturing /lndustrial Center The Tukwila Manufacturing/IndustriaI Center (MIC) is one of eight regionally significant industrial and employment centers in the Central Puget Sound region. Designated as such by the Puget Sound Regional Council, the City has developed a specific element in its Comprehensive Plan and an Implementation Plan to guide redevelopment in the area. The Implementation Plan is structured as a Planned Action under SEPA and was adopted in 1998. This element was developed consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and has been integrated as a component of the City -wide SMP Update. The element includes innovative approaches to combine shoreline redevelopment with environmental conservation, restoration, or enhancement actions. The plan also provides guidelines for integrating habitat enhancement with alternative bank stabilization designs, based in part on King County flood reduction policies and guidelines for bank stabilization. The MIC Plan will be reviewed for any needed amendments after the current SMP update is completed. 7 45 46 Redevelopment in the MIC is also subject to design guidelines developed in 1992 by the Boeing Corporation, in coordination with the City, and described in Duwamish Corridor Redevelopment Proposal /Design Guidelines (Sugio Kobayashi Ullman Inc., 1992). The document, which became part of the MIC Planned Action, establishes goals, objectives, and guidelines for redevelopment of Boeing properties in the Duwamish corridor. Objectives include enhancement of the shoreline environment by replacing old riprap bulkheads with new, more environmentally friendly retention structures and native riparian vegetation. The plan also promotes increased public access as redevelopment occurs, primarily as public and employee -only (semi public) access features and public shoreline access trails. Finally, the plan addresses remediation actions so that as redevelopment occurs, sites with contaminated soil and groundwater are identified and clean up plans are developed, consistent with state and federal laws. As this document is 14 years old, the City will be working with the Boeing Company to identify any needed amendments or revisions to the Redevelopment Proposal after approval by Ecology of the SMP update. Tukwila Urban Center Plan The Comprehensive Plan includes an element addressing the Tukwila Urban Center. The City is currently preparing a Tukwila Urban Center Plan. The Urban Center serves as a regionally significant shopping center (including Westfield Southcenter Mall) with light industrial, office park, and transportation oriented development. The center is generally bounded by I -405, I -5, South 180 Street, and the Green River. Policies and implementation strategies for the Urban Center promote mixed -use commercial and residential development near the Green River, with an integrated network of park, trail, and recreational facilities. Tukwila South The Comprehensive Plan includes an element addressing Tukwila South, an area bounded generally by South 180 Street, I -5, the Green River, and South 204 Street. This area is approximately 75 percent of the southern designated potential annexation area in unincorporated King County, which will be annexed by the City effective December 31, 2009. Currently the area is primarily a mix of agricultural and vacant lands, with a small amount of residential and industrial uses. The Comprehensive Plan element, prior to the adoption of the Tukwila South Master Plan, generally envisioned an extension of the commercial development on the valley floor for this area. As elsewhere in the City, the Comprehensive Plan promotes mixed -use densities for residential development near the river, and maintenance and enhancement of the open space network along the Green River. The Tukwila South Master Plan, required by the Comprehensive Plan prior to any significant development and annexation of the Tukwila South Area, was adopted by the City Council in June 2009. In July 2005, a Final EIS was issued for the 498 -acre Tukwila South Project. The adopted Tukwila South Development Agreement allows up to 10.3 million square feet of development. The development is envisioned to create a major new employment hub with campus -style office and research complexes with an array of commercial, retail, residential, hotel, and recreational uses included. The master plan, described in the Final EIS as being in accordance with the vision and policies of the Tukwila South component of the City's Comprehensive Plan, expects to develop over two phases: Infrastructure Development Stage (3 years) and Full Buildout Stage (horizon of 2030). The Infrastructure Development Stage would include the extension of major roadways (such as Southcenter Parkway) into the area, establishment of site grades throughout the area, installation of utilities and stormwater control facilities, and construction of sensitive areas mitigation as required for the master plan. 8 The Draft Sensitive Area Master Plan (SAMP) and the Fisheries and Wetland Mitigation Plans, included as an appendix to the Final EIS and required because the site was designated a Sensitive Areas Master Plan Overlay District, describe mitigation and restoration of sensitive areas within the Tukwila South Area. These components of the Tukwila South project will be located partially within shoreline jurisdiction and are proposed primarily as mitigation for wetland and stream fill impacts elsewhere on the project site. The plans propose to create 7 -acres of off channel habitat along the Green River, which is direct mitigation for filling of 7,127 feet of streams and ditches in the Tukwila South project area (Ecology "401" Water Quality Certification Permit, 11/7/2005). The habitat area would be designed to provide summer rearing, winter refuge, and upstream migrant holding habitats for fish. Eight- hundred lineal feet of the existing levee would be relocated in a curved fashion landward, between South 196 Street and South 200 Street. Approximately 4.5 acres on the river -side of the relocated levee would be excavated down to the bed elevation of the Green River to create open water habitat. The remaining 2.6 acres would be upland area with slopes ranging from 3:1 to 8:1 and would be planted with a mixture of palustrine emergent species and shrub scrub species. Woody debris snags would be anchored at the upper and lower ends of the restoration area to protect the downstream bank from erosion and to prevent sand bar formation from creating an isolated pool. The plans also propose to restore a perennial fish- bearing stream currently maintained as an agricultural ditch (Johnson Creek). The creek currently discharges to the Green River through a fish blocking floodgate. Around 1,350 feet of Johnson Creek would be relocated to a newly constructed meandering channel and associated floodplain parallel to and north of S 204 Street. A riparian area along the stream would be planted with a mixture of palustrine emergent species, shrub scrub species, and trees. Large woody debris would be anchored to the banks to provide in- stream structure and water velocity modification. A fish- passable flood gate would be installed at the confluence of the Green River to allow fish to migrate through the culvert in the levee and into the tributary under most flow conditions. In June 2009, the City of Tukwila and the Tukwila South Project property owner (La Pianta LLC) entered into a development agreement (Ordinance No. 2233). The development agreement stipulates that the property owner grant permanent easements to the City for maintenance access and improvements to the City's levee system on the west side of the Green River between South 196 Street and South 204 Street, as well as for public bicycle and pedestrian trail access. One of the main purposes of these easements is to make room for future levee improvements. The federally certified 205 levee (from South 180 Street to South 196 Street) is not expected to be altered. As part of the Tukwila South development, La Pianta is proposing to replace the King County- constructed levee system (from South 196 Street to South 204 Street), with a levee designed to meet criteria for federal certification. The existing east -west trending Cross Valley Levee would also be shifted southward from its existing location to the south end of the project area just north of and roughly parallel to South 204 Street. In the context of "reasonably foreseeable future development," the proposed changes at Tukwila South may improve riverine ecological functions by providing off channel habitat restoration along the Green River. However, it is important to note that the foreseeable changes in the Tukwila South project area will not result directly from provisions or regulations within the proposed SMP. The proposed changes will result primarily from the following: Mitigation required by Department of Ecology through the "401" Water Quality Certification and the US Army Corps of Engineers through the "404" Permit (to fill wetlands), 9 47 48 Identification of the Tukwila South area as a Sensitive Area Master Plan Overlay District with area -wide implementation of the sensitive areas ordinance, SEPA environmental review processes, and The development agreement between the City and the property owner. Summary of Conditions and Findings In summary, the City's shoreline planning areas are primarily designated for industrial/manufacturing and commercial/retail land uses. Other areas are primarily designated for low- density single- family uses. Public access and recreational uses along the shoreline are located throughout the city. These uses are not expected to change over time. Most of the City's shorelines are fully developed and future development activities on these properties would largely occur as redevelopment. The inventory and characterization and restoration planning elements of the SMP update should inform goals, policies, regulations, and environment designations. In this context, the key findings can be summarized as follows: The Green/Duwamish River throughout Tukwila is a critical resource, providing migratory habitat for numerous fish species, as well as riparian habitat for a variety of wildlife. The Green/Duwamish River changes from fresh to salt water within Tukwila, making it a unique and important section of the overall river system that deserves attention. Existing shoreline habitat is largely homogenous and degraded throughout the city. The variation that does exist is typically not significant enough to warrant different levels of protection or restoration focus along the shoreline with the exception of the transition zone. The flood protection system is made up of a mix of newer levees (e.g., the 205 levee), and older portions of levee (e.g., the northern portion of the city). The older levees may not meet current engineering standards in terms of slope angles and geotechnical stability, which may provide opportunities for different approaches to redevelopment. Restoration opportunities exist throughout Tukwila's shoreline environment. Activities that provide restoration of both floodplain functions and habitat functions should be prioritized. Policies should promote and regulations should enable the City to accomplish restoration goals and actions. Given the relative homogeneity of the resource condition and needs throughout the city, environment designations should reflect the distinction in current and planned land use and opportunities to expand or enhance restoration. Primarily this is a distinction between existing residential development, where banks may be armored with bulkheads or revetments, and commercial and industrial development elsewhere in the city, where banks are altered by flood control structures. It is important to acknowledge that future shoreline use patterns should not be driven solely by the Comprehensive Plan and zoning. As a result of the SMP update process, changes may be warranted in the Comprehensive Plan, zoning code, and floodplain management regulations to help facilitate long range planning objectives for shoreline management (such as implementation of levee setbacks). That is, since the proposed SMP amendments are informed by a body of technical and scientific shoreline analyses consistent with state guidelines, future amendments to other regulations may be necessary to successfully implement the SMP's vision. The following sections summarize the most significant proposed changes to the Tukwila's SMP and how these changes reflect the findings of the inventory and characterization and restoration planning efforts. 10 Summary of Proposed SMP Amendments Existing Regulatory Framework The City's current SMP designates all shorelines as "Urban." At the time the 1974 SMP was developed, all of the land in Tukwila's shoreline jurisdiction was either zoned industrial or was developed with urban uses. The SMP defines the Urban Environment as "areas to be managed in high intensive land uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial development and accessory uses, while providing for restoration and preservation to ensure long -term protection of natural and cultural resources within the shoreline" (Tukwila, 1974). The SMP further states that the management objectives for the shoreline "are directed at minimizing adverse impacts on the river and shoreline ecology, maximizing the aesthetic quality and recreational opportunities of the river shore, and recognizing the rights and privileges of property owners" (Tukwila, 1974). Within the Urban Environment, Tukwila's SMP employs a three tiered system of regulations based on the distance from the Green River mean high water mark (MHWM). These tiered management zones are generally described below and illustrated on Figure 2: River Environment/Zone: a 40 -foot wide zone extending landward from MHWM and having the most environmentally protective regulations; Low Impact Environment/Zone: the area between the River Environment and 100 feet from the MHWM; and High Impact Environment/Zone: the area between 100 and 200 feet from the MHWM. 200' LOW IMPACT ZONE Proposed Environment Designations RIVER ZONE 11 200' URBAN ENVIRONMENT 100' 4 a' RIVER ZONE c LOW IMPACT ZONE MEAN HIGH WATER LINE Figure 2. Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44) HIGH IMPACT ZONE The City also administers the King County Shoreline Master Program for the areas which have been annexed since the adoption of the City's SMP. These areas are designated Urban and the setbacks from Ordinary High Water Mark vary from 20 feet to 50 feet depending on whether the use is water dependent, single family or commerciaUindustrial. Tukwila's proposed shoreline designation system reflects the state's guidelines. The City's three proposed environment designations are: 49 50 Shoreline Residential Environment; Urban Conservancy Environment; and High Intensity Environment. The City proposes to designate river buffers to replace the current system of parallel shoreline management zones. Instead of the current River Environment, a minimum river buffer would be established for each shoreline environment. Allowed uses are proposed for the buffer area along the river and outside of the buffer in the remaining shoreline jurisdiction. This system is intended to facilitate the City's long -range objectives for land and shoreline management, including: 1. Ensuring no net loss of ecological shoreline functions; 2. Providing for habitat protection, enhancement, and restoration to improve degraded shoreline ecological functions over time and protection of already restored areas; 3. Allowing continued and increased urban development outside of the buffers in recognition of Tukwila's role as a regionally significant industrial and commercial center; and 4. Providing for improved flood control in coordination with King County and the Army Corps of Engineers. The proposed shoreline environment designations and their associated buffers are illustrated in Figures 3 through 5 and described briefly below. Designation criteria, management policies, use regulations, and development standards for each designation and management zone are in the proposed SMP. Shoreline Residential Environment This environment would be designated in the area between the ordinary high water mark and 200 feet landward for all properties zoned for single family use (see Map 3 of the proposed SMP). The purpose of the Shoreline Residential Environment is to accommodate urban density residential development, appurtenant structures, public access and recreational activities. In addition to general shoreline management objectives (above), the protective river buffer would limit development to accomplish the following objectives (not listed in order of priority): Ensure "no net loss" to shoreline ecological functions; Help protect water quality and habitat function by limiting allowed uses; Protect existing and new development from high river flows by ensuring sufficient setback of structures; Promote restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment; and Allow room for reconstructing over steepened river banks to achieve a more stable slope and more natural shoreline bank conditions and avoid the need for shoreline armoring. The width of the buffer will be determined by identifying the location where the river bank would achieve an angle of 2.5:1 (the natural angle of repose to promote more stable banks) and then setting back 20 feet from that location. However, in no case shall the buffer be less than fifty (50) feet from the OHWM, measured on the horizontal. The river bank in the Shoreline Residential Environment is typically in a somewhat modified and degraded state but generally not stabilized with revetments or levees. This buffer width will protect shoreline functions, and allow for restoration by re- sloping and stabilization using bioengineering methods where possible and through planting with native vegetation. The buffer area and vegetation requirements established for the Shoreline Residential Environment will allow removing invasive plants; planting native vegetation; include other 12 features to improve shoreline habitat; and will prevent the placement of any structures in an area that could potentially prove instable. The proposed buffers are wider than those currently required under the existing SMP. A cross section illustrating the proposed Residential Shoreline Environment and buffer is provided in Figure 3. Urban Conservancy Environment 200' Shoreline Residential Environment Ordinary High Water Mark z Figure 3. Schematic of Proposed Shoreline Residential Environment The proposed Shoreline Residential environment would be applied to approximately 14 percent of the city's shoreline. Counting both banks, this represents approximately 3.5 miles of shoreline. This designation would apply to areas currently within the city limits, affecting approximately 200 residential parcels. Approximately 67 residential parcels have existing structures within 50 -feet of the OHWM. The proposed SMP provisions ensure that the "no net loss" standard will be met because: 1) much of the residential development already exists and is located within 50 to 100 feet of the OHWM; and 2) the banks are in a somewhat degraded and altered state (oversteepened; armored in places; and lack native vegetation). The provisions for bank restoration and vegetation enhancement or restoration will be triggered in the Shoreline Residential environment if development or redevelopment includes proposals for bank stabilization or overwater structures. Whether the actual buffer distance on individual parcels becomes the minimum 50 -feet, or something greater after bank reconfiguration, the proposed SMP provisions will ensure that vegetation and bank stability will be improved immediately adjacent to the river. These changes in the shoreline would occur incrementally over time and would not only meet the "no net loss" standard, but should improve ecological functions over time. This environment begins at the Ordinary High Water Mark and extends landward 200 feet along portions of the river not navigable to large water craft and that are not located in low- density residential areas (see Map 3 of the proposed SMP). The Urban Conservancy Environment areas are currently developed with high intensity urban multifamily, commercial, industrial and/or transportation uses or are designated for such uses in the proposed annexation areas. The Urban Conservancy Environment will also be established along Fort Dent Park as this site is bordered by a County constructed levee. However, uses will be restricted immediately adjacent to the river by establishment of a minimum protective buffer intended to protect and restore ecological functions where they exist in urban and developed settings while allowing a variety of compatible uses. 13 51 52 In addition to general shoreline management objectives, the river buffer would be established to accomplish the following objectives (not listed in order of priority): Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, flood plain and other sensitive lands in the developed urban settings; Ensure no net loss of shoreline function when new development or redevelopment is proposed; Provide opportunities for restoration and public access; Allow for adequate flood and channel management to ensure protection of property, while accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement and promoting restoration of the natural character of the shoreline environment, wherever possible; Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and Protect existing and new development from high river flows. The width of the buffer in the Urban Conservancy Environment is proposed as 125 feet, if the shoreline has an existing levee located south of I -405; or 100 feet, if there is no levee. The establishment of the 125 foot buffer along the shorelines with levees south of I -405 allows sufficient room for eventually setting back the levees to a 2.5:1 slope, and including a mid -slope bench that can be planted with native vegetation. This approach widens the channel somewhat to accommodate high flows and improves shoreline function by providing vegetation for habitat enhancement. As the Corps of Engineers does not permit planting on the levee prism, the only way to improve habitat along the 205 leveed portion of the river is to create a bench that can be vegetated that will not create a hazard for the stability of the levee. This levee configuration is the minimum levee profile under the proposed SMP and is the approach currently used by King County and the Corps of Engineers for levee repair /replacement projects. As an alternative to the 100 foot buffer, a buffer reduction of up to 50percent may be authorized if the property owner chooses to lay back the bank to achieve a more stable slope of 2.5:1 plus a 20 -foot wide area at the top of the bank and plant it with native vegetation in accordance with the buffer vegetation standards in the proposed SMP. A cross section illustrating the proposed Urban Conservancy Environment and buffer for leveed areas is provided in Figure 4. 14 200' Urban Conservancy Environment AJIow rotiO .:fur Levee repair replacement; 1_ Ordinary High Water Mark 15 125' Buffer I Figure 4. Schematic of Proposed Urban Conservancy Environment for Areas with Levees The proposed Urban Conservancy environment would be applied to the majority of the city's shoreline (approximately 73 percent). Counting both banks, this represents approximately 18.2 miles of shoreline. This designation would apply to areas currently within city limits and in the Tukwila South PAA, affecting approximately 277 parcels. The designation would apply to areas currently developed with commercial and light industrial uses, as well as less intense uses such as the Foster Golf Links course, Fort Dent Park, and the Tukwila Community Center property. The proposed SMP provisions ensure that the "no net loss" standard will be met because the buffer area (100 to 125 -feet from OHWM) will allow for bank reconfiguration and/or setback levees with vegetated benches. The provisions for bank restoration and vegetation enhancement or restoration will be triggered as development or redevelopment occurs in the Urban Conservancy environment. Whether the actual buffer distance on individual parcels becomes 100 or 125 feet, or something different after bank reconfiguration at a slope of 2.5:1, the proposed SMP provisions will ensure that vegetation and bank stability will be improved immediately adjacent to the river. Even with a buffer reduction in exchange for re- sloping/laying back the bank and planting with native vegetation, resulting buffer widths would be wider than those required under the current SMP. These changes in the shoreline would occur incrementally over time and would not only meet the "no net loss" standard, but should improve ecological functions over the long term. High Intensity Environment This environment will be designated in the area between the Ordinary High Water Mark and 200 feet landward for the area of the shoreline located from the southern end of the Turning Basin north to the City limit (including the City's North PAA) (see Map 3 of the proposed SMP). The High Intensity Shoreline Environment area is currently developed with industrial uses, a few of which are water dependent uses. Some areas of the shoreline in this environment are hardened with riprap or bulkheads, while other areas are more natural banks, such as those in the three restoration sites around the Turning Basin. The purpose of the Urban High Intensity Environment is to provide for high intensity, commercial, transportation and industrial uses while encouraging water dependent uses, protecting existing shoreline ecological functions and restoring ecological functions in areas that have been previously degraded. In addition to general shoreline management objectives (above), the river buffer would be established to accomplish the following objectives (not listed in order of priority): Protect existing and restore degraded ecological functions of the open space, flood plain and other sensitive lands in the developed urban settings; 53 function when new development or redevelopment occurs; Ensure no net loss of shoreline public access; while ortunities for restoration and p rotection of property, Provide opp management to ensure p adequate flood and channel manag and promoting restoration of the natural character oft the Allow for adeq p accommodating shoreline habitat enhancement shoreline environment, wherever possible; Avoid the need for new shoreline armoring; and h river flows• his consistent with ment from g This buffer width support salmonld Protect existing and new develop high water mark. Areas Ordinance for Type 2 streams that th is e City's Sensitive Ar river bank to improve shoreline function over The buffer will extend 100 feet landward from the ordinary the T re-vegetating t the buffer width ows established for setting back and re -veg fish use, back the bank to existing conditions. if the property owner chooses to lay percent may be authorized planted area lay n the to 50 p vegetation plus an additional p -feet wide A buffer reduction of up e and plant it with native veg no steeper than a 3:1 slop top of the new bank. rovided in Figure 5. t h e p High Intensity Environment and buffer is p A cross section illustrating t p ,I 1 1 200' I 1 High i ntensity Environment I I k 10C' Yw.,. `I Alto roam a 1:��i,, a�;.�. {.�,xra;- reconfigure 'h',. .1 Bu{ l -i ,y, R Shea l s bank to river 3 :1 slope Ordinary High Water Mark Figure 5. Schematic of Proposed High Intensity Environment F ►g 13 percent of eline• lied to approxima p t of would apply el areas High Intensity environment would be applied ercen the city's shoreline. miles of shoreline. This design designation The proposed Hig approximately 3.1 m arcon would design Counting both banks, this represents app ern PAA, affecting approximately 34 parcels. arcels. These properties are within the in limits and in the g Northern ro osed SMB Basin. The provisions ensure that the currently the Manufacturing and Industrial Center, north of the Turning for bank would apply e a in th will allow triggered ed primarily with industrial and commercial (1�0 feet from OHWNI) or restoration will be trigg currently develop P vegetation enhancement o ions for bank restoration and veg environment. nt. enhancement the actual on buffer distance on "no net loss" standard will be met because the buffer si slope of 3:1, the reconfiguration. The pro h Intensity reconfiguration at a p r 00f occurs in the different after bank improved immediately adjacent to individual development is or redevelop k stability will be imp rosed MP p r becomes will feet, that something ve getation visions will ensure that veg and ban proposed SMP pro percent buffer reduction, resulting buffer widths will be wider than those currently the river. Even with a 50 p 54 16 required under the existing SMP. These changes in the shoreline would occur incrementally over time and would not only meet the "no net loss" standard, but should improve ecological functions over the long term. Changes to Development Standards and Use Regulations The preference for water dependent or water related uses established in the Shoreline Management Act requires a body of water that is navigable and accessible both to businesses and the general public. The challenge for Tukwila's SMP is that very little of the Green/Duwamish River is navigable for commercial vessels. Of the 13.6 river miles in the City and its PAA, only approximately 1.5 river miles are accessible to deep draft vessels, from the Duwamish River Turning Basin north to the city limits. The vast majority of the river can only be accessed by kayaks, or small motorized boats and definitely not larger ships or barges. In addition, the presence of recently re- certified U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) levees along a major portion of the river prevents direct access to the river, other than via visual access and pedestrian/bicycle trails, thus further limiting the possibility for establishment of water- dependent uses. Other portions of the shoreline are protected by King County constructed levees or over steepened banks armored with revetments, which also limit the possibility of water dependent uses. Nonetheless, water dependent uses are designated as priority uses north of the Turning Basin. The proposed SMP offers several changes to the development regulations that encourage shoreline conservation, facilitate shoreline restoration, and prohibit activities that would cause adverse impact to shoreline functions and processes. The most significant change is related to provisions within the proposed river buffer. The restoration plan identifies vegetation enhancement or restoration as one key priority for shoreline management in Tukwila and the development standards proposed in the SMP establishes vegetation protection and enhancement requirements in the High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environments. The City will work with shoreline property owners to encourage re- vegetation of the shoreline buffer in the Shoreline Residential Environment (bank stabilization projects and projects for overwater structures must include revegetation of buffers as a condition of approval). The restoration plan also prioritizes actions that expand the active channel of the river and/or provide off channel habitat. The application of the new river buffer widths would facilitate projects such as levee setbacks and vegetated benches, as well as removal of shoreline armoring and setting back and re- sloping banks in non -levee areas to achieve a more natural, vegetated shoreline. These actions would occur either as project specific implementation of the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan (restoration plan) or the King County Flood Hazard Management Plan; or as part of redevelopment proposals in coordination with the City, King County, and other stakeholders. Consistent with state guideline requirements, the proposed SMP integrates environmentally sensitive areas regulations (Sensitive Areas Ordinance (SAO), TMC 18.45). Under the proposed SMP, standards and regulations for designated sensitive areas that are physically located in the shoreline jurisdiction would apply to all shoreline uses and development. The SAO standards provide many provisions to protect the shoreline, tributaries to the Green/Duwamish River, associated wetlands, and adjacent upland areas. Another change is the requirement of environmental impact mitigation where unavoidable impacts to shoreline ecological functions would occur as a result of allowed uses or development under the proposed SMP. Consistent with state guidelines (WAC 173- 26- 201(2)(c)), the proposed SMP requires mitigation measures where impacts are unavoidable to achieve the "no net loss" of ecological functions standard. This requirement is applied to any activity that would result in impacts to ecological functions, regardless if the action required a shoreline permit or not. 17 55 56 Other changes include limiting new shoreline modifications such as bulkheads and riprap revetments along much of the City's shoreline. New development would be required to be located and designed to avoid the need for shoreline stabilization measures. The proposed shoreline stabilization standards will limit any new shoreline stabilization, unless it can be shown through extensive studies to be necessary and will require the use of bioengineering techniques wherever feasible. Further, the conservation of native shoreline vegetation and removal of invasive vegetation has been emphasized in the new shoreline regulations for the City to further stabilize shorelands and increase habitat functions. Other changes related to development of specific uses in the shoreline are also designed to protect shoreline ecological functions and processes, while continuing to allow legal uses and development and encouraging public access to the shoreline for water oriented uses such as fishing. Under the proposed SMP, new standards have been developed for non conforming uses and structures. The existing SMP allows the expansion of a building containing a nonconforming use by 25 percent, provided the Planning Commission grants a special permit in cases of evident hardship. Under the proposed SMP, nonconforming uses cannot be enlarged or intensified to occupy additional land or expanded structure. A non- conforming use can be replaced by another non conforming use provided the new use meets certain criteria including avoidance of adverse impacts on shoreline ecological processes and/or functions; restoration of the entire shoreline buffer including paved areas no longer in use; and expansion of the use is limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the intended function. The existing SMP allows a non conforming structure that has been destroyed by not more than 75 percent to be re- built. Under the proposed SMP, such structures, regardless of the extent of destruction, may be rebuilt to their original dimensions. The proposed SMP also allows such structures to be altered or partially reconstructed provided that: 1) new construction does not further intrude into the buffer; 2) reconstruction will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and/or processes; 3) the bank is re- sloped to a 2.5:1 or 3:1 angle in non leveed portions of the river and the entire shoreline buffer is restored (included paved areas no longer in use); or for properties along leveed portions of the river, the remaining buffer area is enhanced, invasive vegetation removed, and native vegetation planted on the levee prism, as allowed by the Corps of Engineers. Single family structures in residential zoning districts which have legally non conforming setbacks from the OHWM may expand the ground floor provided that: 1) expansion occurs along the existing building line(s); 2) the existing distance from the nearest point of the structure to the OHWM is not reduced; 3) the square footage of the new intrusion into the buffer does not exceed 50 percent of the square footage of the current intrusion; and 4) invasive plant species are replaced with native species within the entire shoreline buffer. Non conforming uses and structures that cease or are vacated for 24 consecutive months must be brought into conformance This time limitation may be extended by the City provided the shoreline buffer is restored or enhanced. The proposed changes to development standards and use regulations are, in general, more protective than the existing SMP. New development would be required to meet standards for environmentally sensitive areas within shoreline jurisdiction as well as the policy intent and development standards of the proposed SMP. Redevelopment would be allowed in all environments. As redevelopment occurs, the policies and regulations in the proposed SMP require that development be located and designed in a manner that avoids impacts to ecological functions and/or enhances functions where they have been degraded. For example, the vegetation conservation measures require that, as part of a redevelopment proposal, non native or invasive species be replaced with native vegetation appropriate for riverine riparian environments. Another example pertains to shoreline stabilization (for residential bulkheads or revetments). Policies and development standards establish a preference for alternative "soft- shore" erosion control or stabilization designs. Where shoreline stabilization is requested, project applicants would be required to demonstrate why a bioengineered design would not provide adequate protection of existing 18 development. Existing non conforming uses and structures are allowed to continue under the proposed SMP. However, when changes or expansions occur, shoreline ecological functions would be improved because of the requirements to restore or enhance the shoreline buffer with native vegetation and/or to re -slope non leveed river banks. Over time, as the proposed changes to the SMP are implemented, they will likely have a net beneficial effect on shoreline ecological processes as properties are redeveloped. Restoration Planning As described previously, the SMP Restoration Plan (Appendix B to the proposed SMP) represents the shoreline restoration element of the SMP. The plan includes goals and policies addressing restoration. The policies establish the City's intent is to meet the "no net loss" standard, and result in an overall improvement to the condition of the habitat and resources within the shoreline jurisdiction of the City over time. The plan identifies opportunities for restoration activities or efforts that include programmatic opportunities (e.g. surface water management; water quality improvement; public education), 28 site specific opportunities (some of which are already underway), regional plans and policies for Puget Sound restoration, and potential funding and partnership opportunities. The SMP's restoration planning is focused on areas where shoreline functions have been degraded by past development activities. The areas with impaired functions were identified in the City's Shoreline Inventory and Characterization. Recognizing that much impairment to shoreline processes and functions are the result of watershed scale activities beyond the City's control, the implementation of the Restoration Plan will improve shoreline ecological functions in the City over time. Beneficial Effects of Any Established Regulatory Programs under Other Local, State, and Federal Laws A variety of other regulatory programs, plans, and policies work in concert with the City's SMP to manage shoreline resources and regulate development near the shoreline. The City's Comprehensive Plan establishes the general land use pattern and vision of growth and development the City has adopted for areas both inside and outside the shoreline jurisdiction. Various sections of the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) are relevant to shoreline management, such as zoning (TMC Title 18), stormwater management (TMC 14.30), and floodplain management (TMC 16.52). The City's development standards and use regulations for environmentally sensitive areas (TMC 18.45) are particularly relevant to the City's SMP. Designated sensitive areas located in the shoreline may include areas of potential geologic instability, wetlands, watercourses, and fish and wildlife conservation areas. As noted above, standards and regulations in the critical areas regulations are now integrated in the proposed SMP. A number of state and federal agencies may have jurisdiction over land or natural elements in the City's shoreline jurisdiction. Local development proposals most commonly trigger requirements for state or federal permits when they impact wetlands or streams; potentially affect fish and wildlife listed under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA); result in over one acre of clearing and grading; or affect the floodplain or floodway. As with local requirements, state and federal regulations may apply throughout the city, but regulated resources are common within the City's shoreline jurisdiction. The state and federal regulations affecting shoreline related resources include, but are not limited to: Endanzered Species Act: The federal ESA addresses the protection and recovery of federally listed species. The ESA is jointly administered by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries (formerly referred to as the National Marine Fisheries Service), and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 19 57 58 Clean Water Act (CWA): The federal CWA requires states to set standards for the protection of water quality for various parameters, and it regulates excavation and dredging in waters of the U.S., including wetlands. Certain activities affecting wetlands in the City's shoreline jurisdiction or work in the adjacent rivers may require a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or Washington State Department of Ecology under Section 404 and Section 401 of the CWA, respectively. Hydraulic Proiect Avvroval (HPA): The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) regulates activities that use, divert, obstruct, or change the natural flow of the beds or banks of waters of the state and may affect fish habitat. Projects in the shoreline jurisdiction requiring construction below the ordinary high water mark of Puget Sound or streams in the city could require an HPA from WDFW. Projects creating new impervious surface that could substantially increase stormwater runoff to waters of the state may also require approval. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): Ecology regulates activities that result in wastewater discharges to surface water from industrial facilities or municipal wastewater treatment plants. NPDES permits are also required for stormwater discharges from industrial facilities, construction sites of one or more acres, and municipal stormwater systems that serve populations of 100,000 or more. The City is in the process of revising its stormwater regulations to meet the new municipal NPDES permit requirements. There will be more stringent stormwater management requirements for control of stormwater volume and quality that should result in improvements in water quality and greater emphasis on the use of low impact development techniques throughout the City, which will also improve conditions in the Green/Duwamish River. State -owned Aauatic Lands: The Washington State Department of Natural Resources is the steward for the State owned bed of the Green/Duwamish River and would regulate any structures constructed in the bed of the river, such as piers. Current and Future Performance of Shoreline Ecological Functions The attached tables summarize the existing performance of shoreline ecological functions along the Green River as described in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (ESA Adolfson, 2007). Actions that would potentially cause a loss of shoreline function, and regulations from the proposed SMP that would protect or improve ecological functions are identified. The net impact expected from implementing the regulatory provisions of the proposed SMP is described along with opportunities for restoration of ecological functions. The tables below are focused on the effectiveness of the regulatory provisions in meeting the "no net loss" standard. Site specific restoration opportunities are outlined in the Restoration Plan (ESA Adolfson, 2007, updated in 2009) and are not directly evaluated as part of this assessment. The tables are organized by shoreline reach (as identified in the inventory and characterization report; see Figure 1 above), moving from the south to the north: G -1 PAA (Tukwila South Potential Annexation Area) G -1 (from upstream city limits to the Black River /Green River confluence) G -2 (from the Black River /Green River confluence to the downstream city limits) G -2 PAA (Tukwila North Potential Annexation Area) 20 Conclusion In large measure, the development and use patterns along Tukwila's shorelines are well established and there is little undeveloped land along the shoreline. Tukwila's identity as a regionally significant industrial, manufacturing, and commercial center will be maintained. Therefore, change within the shoreline will primarily be the result of redevelopment activities. The proposed SMP provides a new system of shoreline environment designations and river buffers that would protect shoreline resources and enable enhancement and restoration actions. The updated development standards and regulation of shoreline modifications provides more protection for shoreline processes. The updated standards and regulations are more restrictive of activities that would result in adverse impacts to the shoreline environment. The restoration planning effort outlined in the proposed SMP provides the City with opportunities to improve or restore ecological functions that have been impaired as a result of past development activities. In addition, the proposed SMP is meant to compliment several city, county, state and federal efforts to protect shoreline functions and values. Based on the assessment of these factors, the cumulative actions taken over time in accordance with the proposed SMP are not likely to result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions from existing baseline conditions. Instead, it is expected that the regulatory provisions of the proposed SMP would result in an overall improvement of functions along the Green/Duwamish River. However, since most ecological functions along the Green River are heavily influenced by conditions and activities throughout the upper watershed, the improvements are not expected to be significant at the watershed scale. In concert with implementation of restoration actions in the city, the regulatory provisions of the proposed SMP would serve to improve the overall condition of shoreline resources in the city as redevelopment occurs. 21 59 60 t Net Loss, Reac► G1 'implementation of t �?reven ExPec tedfromimp aced standards loss het Impact ns of SMP F hods in Proposed SMp to prevent r Risks to Ecos _t ii1 minimize risk or minim na lySlS^ a net loss} paned an c hannel d and t1d� 1� Risk would cause 5.1 slope ew 5Mp CumulativeF A c� �ctions that uld levee recon trollmgn corn banks at i ees exile improvement t eermg• width would increase ll stabilized u nngb eA channel d p tovt Sects. to be constructe intertidal habitats. Ze for flood storage De ore natural �t< Ecosystem ened Shorelin OTmg on o ver steep ach an d Sh New hard shoreline arm signatioII bardcs leveereconstt°cnon �teracnon �Surf alogy –Ce,edu r reducing downstream 1 Surface storage, t for ng processes, Reach; GI Urban flooding, habitat form Designati hypox functions Desig trained and Conservan former f rodptain by Land Cw Ye ntsit situation: channel co (Current idly developed separa a nd Levee. Gilliam Creek has puny elopin tpote armoring redevelopment potential fopga which limits interaction. Commercial (office, warehouse, retail), park. (soccer fields), heavy and equ s tormwat er deten tion facility, major detention tie and highway iuterchan° o s over several vehicle bride r iver. Left bank– federally 405 certified levee from s outh. Rig a Hydrology Groundwater Recharge not a significant function Current valley is groundwater discharg raver valley is a slivery `fluvial tr Sediment D not asignifcantf Lion: ffeCjed atwatershed Current strut Process controlled 1s Novae. Sediment Delivery and Removal upland Level upriver articulate Sedum sediment generation and p fine oversteea d some levee slopes, inkier Blvd' in retention shoreline is south of M each along e vious surfaces (esP; north end ofx bank)• Current situation: o s eroding, For tDentPar k(right deveiop w hich disc hm8 on left ouch o a ter05) disc banks o Ciy's o f bank soutl+ s gem. k� p trail on rep s a ute f ne s edimen ts d ntribute likely most of reach e M m e s ban nts. along htbank contributin ark rt lower f 1 t on rig ed areas r bank of S 180th. u npaved Fort Dentdireet discharg d l v ee- out possible, on -site elevation behflt is not post Some conditions: nattO f j esedime n ondpr n o rth av d of red hullers. poorly h stornnvater detention hug enter river front Gilliam t rearm north end of reach, ru es e es sib f c ovet, p discharge, which receives oar quality tree tts quality unde n mid and storm water contributions (south er is of reach poo Quality –nutrient refs ftltrat and south pans derstory cover. W mo Q hosphorous through through Kee and removal (p removal and nitrogen f hoe} canopy 1 retention qtr wetland in shoreline denitt i tea large ire ht bank 115 One w not including on right jurisdiction, ratan fringe Current situation of reach and removed ba nd ed rip ha been in h oreli watercourses northern of each. Tree levee. n Po wetlands, tivee a11v certified Loss of wetlands due to filling m and reconstruction ew hard S uds for bench and standards con m id slope be 9.5, 9.6) armoring (Sects. back of banks in exchange 4o. Laying to 50% reduction of up SMP (Sett Sensitive areas protection provisions m 10) No significant risks �e sedimen significant impairment transpor r ve et atio n a l ong i (Sect. val of g Y 5 remo ened batiks for Ian SM t.and cle otn over -steep d cleating m control for projects, r vet, lauds t remove fine etoston (current secluding 125 ft (curt Inadequate stomttvatet treatment to rem ider buffets 100 with limits incre ent of w areas (Sect. 7 t. pe diment and particulate Establishm leveed d uses (sect. 8) buffer risk buffers 40 ft.) eveed an impervious surface in blow risk due to ble situ oval and vegetation on allowable plants Increased imps prohibiting native vegetation removal possible retention by enh ancement with native existing development) Standards (except e t w federally certified levee requiring w here in buffer 0) exists) (Sect 9. of riverltloodplain interface th rtherre duction oTmg on over h additional hard 01515 from eder Dec 200 shoreline jurisdiction Black f' f—"' sequencing, and tningau Creek and acts Analysis Gilliam "'y impacts, mitigation sea Cumulative Impacts t.. environmental imp Impacts/Final Cwn Ana lysis of potential en ulative Imp S3,1 waLongRangeProjects ,ShorelineiCum acing, unles hard Standards prohiba em new es (in that case mitigation studies show no and standards for levee a bench would be required) with a planted mid -slop re pair/repla cement (Sect. throng 9 5 9 and tree steepened banks With prohibiting native vegetation e uiringbuffer vegetation aeration and removal and r q f Kees and native station in the I Removalo eg reduction of fl oodplatn area. apply to all projects in the Shoreline jurisdiction on (Sect. 9.8 of SW) o/t es accepted, 12109/2009 l u lbnpact chang 1 No Ne Loss Table -Cum f 1 Opportun provided for in SM.? for restoration provisions o f function regulatory P Mitigationp j leveed areas set of replace lost vementi functions. 'Potential significant re coped to preferred 0500 profile to off- Pozen area. Potential ects, as they are re hat wider c e re slope expected Restoration Pgestotation improve f non levee ev id entified in No new °tease Plan, mostly m northern i loo bioenginee a t zone an de a part of mostly eg(1t n orthern create a larger aquatic to w wetland reto river) transition from b pr otected. 11IA 141A Wetlands will I No change No change ntiv for re due to ince a L ile_ vegetating ent (few existing ter re gulation s a ors in sloping and provide greater Slight s tovem d new stormw permit it t require stability at time of Slug ermit teat wilcl and In°°t more Po si t e treatment and new P during land redevelop t o City MPs respo t ides. d 8 more on site tte? vities. co nstructio n improvement when currently unpaved sites Slight redevelop due to wider buffer requirements and re vegetation requirements N totectio ion p ects, per due to vegetation p' the Restoration Plan uirements, wider buffers, new levee Improvement in some areas, ent req Voluntary laying back and and file with planted mid -slope bench. planting of banks in profde with plan g ,e for buffer reduction and buffer re- reduct teach an d Shoreline Designat River, and Stream "E, which is piped to stonnwater pump station). sw jcosy stem Fun ction es to the retention of eat and floodplain contnbng of sedim i n midi c f reach, but phosphorous Ro t� trapping the ve getation ce waters anderstary ve y eg¢tation in parts a generally groundwater and surface Boas overhanging k and ege tation that reach (willows). Functional 1 buffers and large trees Sc ding) narrow (largely restricted fbattk o bank Removal of e e overhangs water (elimination to shin narrow strip on rTemperatur a and Quality a�dwater discharg Water Q Reduction in temperature is a have mature trees b Current removed s ituation but certified levee roblYem ved fi federally been Engineers s requirements and per Corps of u a issue) r land is fully with of reach and upland with impervious surfaces (temperature buffet (i.e., no New incervious surfaces in ocontaminants) and m rent amioants filtering out watershed Quality c ontributing W ater Q Bible sources of Untreated stormwater runoff it land possible adjacent Currents n (unpaved areas where potential co pesticide out materials heavy e land uses sung maintenance, &e Use!siorage of ha heavy ¢qui o landscape m o Na nce, s (utilise*' use f snra!( quantities of Excessive use of pesticides storag m aterials Methods in p pp$ed SMP to prevent toss Minimize rfslc or min Risks Would cause a net loss) (actions that tv Sect 9,10). native plants 'LWDIOrganic inputs Large tree canoh bank.'" 1 Current situation- reach and on right removed northern of parts of rein have been rem much of reach, Tres from federally certified lev ration Riparian buffers and over -win Rip Patting in buffer or patting in (oils adequate stormwater treatment Large tree remOVal prohibit tree removal, w i t h m itigation Standards S 9 .10), (however tree removal required required mitigation for removed trees to be done WD placem r e on levee elsewhere in shoreline' Lent plane Standards requiring Te'veg buffers. buffer requiring mitigation (Sect. S, 9 Standards controlling structures m .2) Standards prohibiting increase to runoff and (Sect 9. airing requiring (Sect. 8 9 structures ibtting increase mitigation (Sect S. LID techniques Standards requiring stormw i ues (Sat 9 Stan n ttechn q low impact develop rue d coati without drips) runoff and requiring nt and use of inter treatment 4) agency plans, prohibiting prohibiti g spill prevention within 100 R of pl hibunng sensitive area (Sect 9.12) dons Standards that pCOhibition of (Sect fute waste facilities m shor controlling use of pesticides (Sect. requirement for managem plans for areas Standards etnent adjacent to river requiring large turf manag Le o rtDent tarfire facility). (port Deni 4arklS s for buffers Secr. 8 Uses�datd itingaanvevegera g,10)• Mitigation requirements that include addition of LWD in river r with planted Required profile forlevee 5 P� 100 or 125 ft mid -slope width from 'Wetted from Implements Net Impact DxP of SNIP regulatory provisions Slight improv ee t in win er t shade ture due to of trees retentionlp Potential improvement in water water regulatio e to SMcomplY and new p ety's fDESpermm with City's NP 1 ton 01 r provided for in SW for restoration of functions ve getation cnt due to strengthe tree protection with and future levee retorts removal, tree Improvement n memo te�ulations in SM Bch v egetation mi d slope rohib eats for planting n ative planted r Standards oval 4 re quireme nts ad trees $eCY. removal and also, requirement to leave Las l users vegetation, also, card to bwld'mgs place unless a hazer (Sect 91 1 le d of riparian buffers hacemen eat in quality and width 1 Improvem bench expected for sites that redevelop 40 R C° increase in Incre leYe Sect Z 7 vegetation removal, levee (if behind a led 12109(2004 Large tree and other g es accep 2 Cumul SmpaC. c hin °g ter v egetation maintenance 1 No NetbossT ImpaetsiVinal Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009 /G W :tl..ong Range FroJ eCt ShorelinelCumlative ---rte s for Education P shoreline proPettY L WD installation as part I of restoration projects m itigation projects that Restoration p include buffer Reach and Shoreline Ecosystem Function Designation Current situation— large tree canopy in northern parts ofreach and on right bank in much of reach. Trees have been removed _from federally certified levee. Poor understay vegetation in much of reach ,but some overhanging vegetation in some areas (willows). Functional buffers generally narrow (largely restricted to bank and top of bank only). In- stream habitat for fish and wildlife (especially for salmonids and bull trout) Current situation—generally poor in stream habitat due to channelization, levees and steep armored banks. Some pools and riffles from LWD in river and some beaches/mud flats exposed at low tide in northern part of reach. Risks ortun Methods in proposed SMP to prevent loss regulatory provided for in t provisions of SMP Implementation of PP ties i SMP for restoration (actions that would cause a net loss) or minimize risk° of functions improvements Buffer reductions Increased annoring on banks New over -water structures (bridges are most likely) Large tree removal (elimination of shade, source of future large woody debris, p erching and nesting locations for birds). Removal of native vegetation overhanging the river (shade, food supply, source of large woody debris) New hard shoreline amoring on over- steepened banks In/overwater structures with impacts on fish passage, shading, habitat disruption Filling of riparian wetland, off channel habitat reduction of up to 50% Standards that exchange for re-sloping bank d nkand enhancing buffer vegetation Standards protecting trees and native vegetation and re- vegetation requirements, and mitigation for unavoidable vegetation removal (Sect 9.10.) (Note: specific policy established for overhanging vegetation) Standards that require bioengineering techniques for bank stabilization (Sect. 9.6) Standards for overwater structures (Sect. 9.12) Standards prohibiting native vegetation and tree removal and requiring enhancement of buffers with native, overhanging vegetation (Sect 9 10). Standards controlling new hard armoring (Sect. 9.6), encouragement of reducing steep slopes of banks with native plantings (Sect. 7.7, in exch Inge for r2.5:1 buffer reduction) and design profile for slope with vegetated mid -slope bench. Standards for in -water and overwater structures, requirement for special studies to show no net loss, mitigation requirements (Sect. 9.12) Prohibition of wetland tilling, protection of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (Sect. 10) 3 Ran e Projects /Shoreline /Cumulative hnpacts/Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009/G1 No Net Loss Table Cumul Impact changes accepted, 12/09/2009 S.W W. /Long g No change for width reduced buffers (maximum reduction would be 50% in non -levee areas, which is still wider than the current 40ft. Banks would be at natural angle of repose and buffer would be enhanced with native plantings resulting in a significant improvement ntover existing riparian conditions. No chang e for leveed areas, but levee mid -slope benches would provide improved riparian habitat. Improvement if banks are restabilized using bioengineering techniques No change if mitigation carried out and standards followed Improvement over existing in- stream habitat, few in or overwater structures expected, except for new pedestrian bridge in this reach Restoration projects to increase in- stream habitat esp. off- channel and near channel areas Voluntary laying back and vegetating riverbanks with native plants rn -NTukwila SMP Cu Impact Analysis Risks to Ecosystem Functions and Proposed Standards to Prevent Net L Reach and Shoreline Designation Reach: G2 (Black River /Green River confluence to north City limit) Designations: High Intensity, Urban Conservancy, Shoreline Residential Existing Land Use: High Intensity Environment: northernmost part of reach, includes the turning basin: industrial (truck parking, aircraft industry), transportation: private vehicle bridge. Several salmon habitat restoration sites in turning basin (left bank) off channel areas, mud flats, riparian wetland. Urban Conservancy- Industrial, office, commercial/warehousing, institutional (Federal Post office), recreational (Boeing employees facility), Foster Golf Course. Significant impervious surface existing except for open space. Recreational trail along river in much of reach. Southgate and Riverton Creeks are tributary to river. Ecosystem Function Risks (actions that would cause a net risk loss) New hard shoreline armoring on over steepened banks Hydrology Channel/Flood Plain Interaction: Surface storage, reducing downstream flooding, habitat forming processes, hyporheic functions Current situation: generally constrained due to channelization, .steep armored banks (some eroding). Hydrology Groundwater Recharge Current situation: not a significant fraction —valley is discharge area Sediment Delivery fluvial transport Current situation: not a significant function process controlled and affected at watershed level upriver from •om Tukwila Sediment Delivery and Removal upland fine sediment generation and particulate retention Current situation: nrostly impervious surface in Urban Conservancy; some unpaved area in High Intensity, unpaved areas in Shoreline Residential, fine sediment sources: unpaved parking lots, residential gardens, upland sources outside of Shoreline jurisdiction, which contribute sediment to tributaries; narrow, poorly vegetated buffers; general lack ofstormwater treatment. Water Quality nutrient retention and removal (phosphorous through filtration and retention and nitrogen removal through denitrification) Current situation: absence of large trees in High Intensity Env. and much of Urban Conservancy. Good tree cover in New overwater /in -water structures Loss of wetlands fish and wildlife habitat areas due to filling/bank armoring No significant risks No significant risks for coarse sediment transport impairment Land clearing, removal of vegetation along river, landslides from over steepened banks, increased impervious surface in buffer Inadequate stormwater treatment to remove fine sediment and particulates Further reduction of river floodplain interface through hard armoring on over steepened banks Removal of trees and native vegetation and reduction of floodplain area. Vegetation in the floodplain contributes to the retention of phosphorous from the Methods in proposed SMP to prevent loss or minimize Standards controlling new hard armoring requiring bioengineering techniques (Sect. 9.6). Voluntary lay back of banks in exchange for buffer reduction of up to 50% (excluding residential uses) (Sect. 7.6,7.7,7.8) Standards controlling extent and design of new over -water structures (Sec 9.12), mitigation required (Sect. 9.12) Sensitive areas protection provisions in SMP (Sect 10) N/A N/A r Analysis of potential environmental impacts, mitigation sequencing, and mitigation (Sect. 9.8 of SMP) apply to all projects in the Shoreline Jurisdiction 1 Adequate stormwater treatment (Sect. 9 4) and increase in buffer width from 50 ft to 100 ft in High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environments and from 20 ft to 50 ft in residential areas.(Sections 7.6, 7 7, 7.8) Standards for land clearing in SMP (Sect. 9 11), including erosion sediment control for projects Standards prohibiting native vegetation removal and requiring vegetation enhancement in buffer (Sect 9.10). Restrictions on what structures can be built in buffer (Sect 8) Standards prohibiting new hard armoring, unless studies show no alternatives (in that case mitigation would be required) and standards for levee reconstruction (Sect. 9.5, 9.6) Standards prohibiting native vegetation and tree removal and requiring vegetation enhancement in buffer for new /re- development (except residential under 4 lots (Sect 9.10). SW W: /Long Range Projects/Shoreline /Cumulative Impacts/Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009/G2 No Net Loss Table Cumul Impact changes accepted oss, Reach G2 Net Impact Expected from Implementation of regulatory provisions of SMP Slight improvement as failing banks are stabilized with less steep slopes and bioengineering techniques, if property owners take advantage of incentive to re -slope steep banks in exchange for buffer reduction. Improvement in overwater structures as old structures are replaced. Increased channel width would increase flood storage, create a larger intertidal zone and provide a more natural transition from aquatic to upland habitats. Slight im __era in protection of sensitive areas No change No change Significant improvement in High Intensity area as area redevelops (where little stormwater treatment exists and many areas along river are unpaved) Improvement in High Intensity and Urban Conservancy due to wider buffers and enhanced buffers planted with dense native vegetation Slight improvement over time as buffer vegetation is enhanced through site redevelopment, voluntary planting, mitigation for over -water structures, bank stabilization. Opportunities provided for in SMP for restoration of functions Mitigation projects to off -set or replace lost functions Restoration projects including those that lay back banks and create shallow intertidal areas and off channel areas N/A N/A Incentive built in for re- sloping and re- vegetating banks to provide greater stability at time of redevelopment Restoration projects Voluntary riparian vegetation enhancement Reach and Shoreline Ecosystem Function Designation h reline Residential Single Family residential, parks open space (Tukwila Community Center, Codiga Park, future Duwamish River Bend Hill Park (partly in shoreline jurisdiction), North Wind Weir (both banks), Duwamish Park. Streets (42 "a Ave S S 155 s dacent to river, with gravel err[ situation: potential Risks (actions that would cause a net loss) trapping of sediment and denitrificarion Shoreline Residential and along Foster of citrate -N within the groundwater and Golf Course. surface waters Removal of large trees vegetation that overhangs water (elimination of shading) Current situation: high temperature is Increase in impervious surfaces larger trees n igh nl rva s n cy Good tree ty Env. And (stonnwater temperatures) large trees Urban H C o se oundwater discharge and much o cover in n SShorr Conservancy. Residential and along Reduction sm gr Foster Golf Course. New impervious sur in buffer (i.e., Water Quality contaminants no filtering out of contaminants) and in contributing watershed Water Quality Temperature a j Cw+ shoulders. contmnbtation f'onr ongoing industrial activities in High Intensity Environment (general lack of st onmvater treatment). Lower risk in Urban Conservancy and Shoreline Residential. Unheated stonnwater runoff Overwater structures (such as marinas or boat yards) with transport, use or storage of hazardous materials Some contamination of sediments due to Use/storage of hazardous materials previously contaminated sites Excessive use of pesticides /fertilizers LWD /Organic inputs Current situation absence of large trees in High Intensity Env. dd tree cover co er in Urban Conservancy Shoreline Residential and along Foster Golf Course. Riparian buffers and overwater vegetation Current situation: all buffers narrow, poor understo+y vegetation (mostly invasive plants), poor tree canopy except in Shoreline Residential and along Foster Golf Course Parking in buffer or parking in areas without adequate stonnwater treatment (oil drips) Large tree removal Removal of trees and native vegetation Methods in proposed SMP to risk' Buffers increased from 50 ft to 100 ft Conservancy Environments and from 2 prevent loss or minimize in High Intensity and Urban 20 ft to 50 ft in residential areas. Standards that prohibit tree removal with mitigation required (Sect 9.10) Standards controlling structures in buffer requiring mitigation (Sect. 8, 9.2), prohibiting increase in runoff and requiring LID techniques (Sect 9.4) Standards controlling structures in buffer requiring mitigation (Sect. 8, 9.2), prohibiting increase in runoff and requiring LID techniques (Sect 9 4) Standards requiring stonnwater treatment (Sect 9 4) ill prevention and contingency plans, prohibiting Standards requiring spill development within 100 ft of sensitive area (Sect 9.12) Standards that limit use of treated pilings (Sect 9 12). Prohibition of commercial hazardous waste facilities in shoreline jurisdiction (Sect 8). Standards controlling use of pesticides (Sect. 9,10.D), requirement for management plans for areas requiring large turf management adjacent to river (golf course). Use standards for buffers (Sect. 8), stonnwater treatment required (Sect. 9 4) Standards prohibiting native vegetation removal, tree removal and requirements for planting native vegetation (Sect 9 10). Mitigation requirements that include addition of LWD (Sect. 9.10) Standards prohibiting native vegetation and tree removal and requiring buffer vegetation enhancement when redevelopment occurs (Sect 9 10). and Buffers onservancy Envi orunents g and from 20 ft to 50 ft in Intensity residential Urban areas.(Sections 7.6, 7 7, 7.8) Buffer reductions in High Intensity Environment Urban Conservancy up to 50% (no buffer reductions allowed in Shoreline Residential Environment) in exchange for re- sloping bank and planting SW. W; /bong Range Projects /Shoreline /Cumulative Imp acts /Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009 /02 No Net Loss Table Curnul Impact changes accepted Net Impact Expected from Opportunities provided for Implementation of regulatory in SMP for restoration of provisions of SMP functions Some improvement expected tt s sites redevelop. Little chang e protected retention, as trees are already P under separate tree ordinance, however SMP tree protection is stronger. Significant improvement expected in High Intensity Environment as sites redevelop (buffer vegetation enhancement, stonnwater requirements in SMP, and new NPDES requirements. Also, improvements expected due to clean -up actions under Superfund in High Intensity Environment. Urban Slight improvements Conservancy and Shoreline Residential Cons Long -tent improvement in areas of reach which have no large trees currently (through requirements for re- vegetating buffers upon redevelopment) (source of LWD). Slight improvement through LWD replacement nrolects Improvement in quality and width of riparian buffers expected, for sites that redevelop No change for width reduced buffers (maximum reduction would be 50% in non -levee areas, which is still wider at natural angle of repose and buf er would be enhanced with native plantings resulting in a significant Voluntary tree planting, stewardship education for shoreline property owners (planned) Stewardship education for property owners and City maintenance crews. Restoration projects with riparian plantings, stewardship assistance voluntary buffer restoration by property owners rn C.)Reach and Shoreline Ecosystem Function Designation In -stream habitat for fish and wildlife (especially for salmonids and bull trout). Current situation: freshwater /saltwater transition zone in northern part of reach. Several new salmon habitat restoration sites in turning basin and at North Winds Weir (left bank) and Codiga Park have added in -stream habitat— riparian wetland mudflat/beaches, off channeUbackwater areas. Risks (actions that would cause a net loss) with native vegetation New bank armoring New overwater structures (docks in residential areas) Removal of large trees that could form in- stream habitat Filling/dredging of riparian wetland, off channel habitat Methods in proposed SMP to prevent loss or minimize risk' Standards controlling new hard armoring and bank stabilization (Sect. 9.6) Standards for in -water and overwater structures, requirement for special studies to show no net loss, mitigation requirements (Sect. 9.12) Buffers increased from 50 ft to 100 ft in High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environments and from 20 ft to 50 ft in residential areas.(Sections 7.6, 7 7, 7.8) Buffer reduction to no less than 50% in exchange for re- sloping bank and stabilizing with bioengineering techniques including planting of native vegetation to overhang water (Section 7.6, 7 7, 7.8) Standards prohibiting native vegetation and tree removal and requiring buffer vegetation enhancement when redevelopment occurs (Sect 9.10). Standards controlling new hard armoring and bank stabilization (Sect. 9.6) Standards for in -water and overwater structures, requirement for special studies to show no net loss, mitigation requirements (Sect. 9.12) Prohibition of wetland filling, protection of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (Sect. 10) 3 SW W:/Long Range Projects/Shoreline /Cumulative Impacts/Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009/G2 No Net Loss Table Cumul Impact changes accepted Net Impact Expected from Implementation of regulatory provisions of SMP improvement over existing riparian conditions. No change for reduced buffers in leveed areas, but levee mid slope benches would provide improved riparian habitat. Improvement if banks are restabilized using bioengineering techniques No change if mitigation carried out and standards followed Potential improvement Opportunities provided for in SMP for restoration of functions Restoration projects prioritized in transition zone esp. oft channel and back channel areas SAP Cumulative Fact and osystena "Function eac and Shoreline Designati retention pa)vsi5^ Vasks to Ecosystem cause a net I �inimitie risk would A gisks factions that loss) Channel/F plain Hydrology' storage, reducing 1 Interaction: Surfa habitat forming Reach; CT ban ream flooding, habitat f Designation/ Ur downstream hypotheic functions Conservancy actual interaction situation: little t k ith o ver d u e to s certi ied levee Ilse: a nd tributary watercourse LandU duero»an- (Curr ent uuture, rT s huctur flo d steepened bank lr levee into river t 1 e veethr e tha fl ¢charg Agra coon, t Fu's Shore m h emir Gtoun length (not h cross Cur v alley certifie 90 Ate discharge area �anspnrt valley m is in t oc ¢ss from S. oodplain f with small portion in Ne w cross valley Shoreline Jurisdiction develop m tributary and stream relocation t Johnson developm Creek 110 significant risks control levee throng H y drology n ot a significant ttndwaier Federally rent situation. is a tisks foz coarse sediment 'tin significant ens dlevee) w i t a function river ttimpatr e at S 1 fluvial transpor l90 south SednnentDelivery funcnon p el meet affected at 'watershed ley for site develop (duet mapped fl t a significa w roces f Grading and filling (due to non -certified levee)• Not and a lnvi a upland I M change will be i li Sediment t T an d Retention p w cross Delivery and particulate requeste furthe south. e stalled fin s e invent generation valley levee to be m fine sedimen further south. ntf of Lamds e leve used Standards toy prevent loss or t lv het Impact tcte y pe o SMP Standards for new and rebuilt levee const d px0 0£ regulatory provisions hods in Proposed SMp to prev -Functions an coon requiring ru less steep slope (Sect. 9.5) Sensitive areas provisions in SMp (Sect 10) N1A lidestfailures on over steepened banks of water treatment to %move fine N 1A n sediment Inadequate st Current situation: e¢ lower 1r adeq d articulates and behind levee sediment equ o s p oth top of activities s does no o to river dir o ftev¢¢1, but could flow than top small, interface via tributary strewn th has over- inadequate buf Further reduction of riverffl o nadeq through additional hard armoring nutrient through retention an teed banks of levee wa uality filtza steep ca l (phosp /ion a nit' gee Te oval through' i trees and native vegetation from removal and nittoge rebuilt levee Removal of h areas o[ from area. and retention newly restored o floodpla d tuat benc hes and d areas o con t le es to the of titde s o m e has Vegetation in the floodplam the trapping to thwithin Cu situation 9 r ith retentio of phosphorous fro ofnittat :11 vegetation present in evee main w en itriftcati on removed t° eat and d fact f nit been r ecently sedim f gngineef•s levee niaint¢nane the groundwater and sits Corps o standard ent (Sect. 9 4), and new water treatment implement new and 14P1DES ne Standards for storm to City stormwa' regulations T Standards for land clearing in construction erosion sediment control erosion sedim mid-slope b r equiremen ts (Sect. 9.11), including nSMp( n benches in re- built ((Sect) 10) required nd wider ivegetated buffers on Sect 9.1 I b ilt levees tream U restored ttibutary s with vegetated mid -slope Standards for levee construction hie removal Standards prohibiting native vegetation and (Sect 9 10). bench (S e ct 9 5) horeline Jurisdiction es accepted, 12109/2009 1 to all projects in the S h Cumul Impact chang 9.8 of NoNefLossTable d mitigation (Sect. 9. Dec 20091G1? AA anon sequencing, an acts Analysis D v ronmemtal impacts, m itigation Analysis of potential en Impacts/Final Cumulative Impacts SW lLo( gRzngeRroJecUShorelinelCumulative Reach Opportuni G tLosS d goer I provided for in SW for restoration of function meat: levee ent due to planned icfuture 1 provide slightly Tovem htl Improvement (lay back steep slope); prop o re construc tion eG OnstN and less acts to include off m chan fr development impacts 2 6 upland t 5 open te1 salmon habitat butary stream improvements, crease flood storage and open water) and Increased larger intertidal in width would c reate a large ut errtidal zone.. -trio change o change Two restoration ed future development projects identified in ent P with plaint this reach e t° identified Improvement expected permanent stortmwateT manage(' can out by Imp o f new stonnwat lea wily and p er of "f uk be due to temporary implementation develop staards f requirements an DES permit. South project awetland standards for NR mitigation for a (fun) and watercours impacts N Imprnv anent as levee is rebuilt and mid -slope benches d vegetation matures are planted O ff-channel r e,storation project as mentio above Water Quality Temperature Current situation: high temperature is problem for salmonids little to no riparian vegetation in this reach, no large trees Water Quality contaminants Current situation agricultural practices possible source of contamination (fertilizers, pesticides) LWD /Organic inputs Current situation: brier comprised of levee with little native riparian vegetation Riparian buffers and overwater vegetation Current situation: high temperature is problem for salnonids little to no riparian vegetation in this reach. Buffer largely taken up by levee) In -stream habitat for fish and wildlife (especially for salmonids and bull trout). Current condition: virtually no adequate in- stream habitat due to channelization and levee. Stream discharges via non- fish-friendly culvert and flap gate through levee Removal/topping of large trees vegetation that overhangs water (elimination of shading) Increase in impervious surfaces (stormwater temperatures) Reduction in groundwater discharge and base flows Untreated stormwater runoff Use/storage of hazardous materials Excessive use of pesticides for landscape maintenance Parking in buffer or parking in areas without adequate stormwater treatment (oil drips) (possible use prior to levee set -back) Minimal risks from site redevelopment little opportunity for LWD Increased buffer widths from 50" to 125 Buffer reduction after levee setback and installation of mid -slope planted bench (expected maximum reduction of 25 ft). Low risks due to non existence of in -stream habitat Standards that prohibit tree removal with mitigation required (Sect 9.10) Standards controlling structures in buffer requiring mitigation (Sect. 8, 9.2), prohibiting increase in runoff and requiring LID techniques and adequate stormwater treatment (Sect 9 4) Standards controlling structures in buffer requiring mitigation (Sect. 8, 9.2) Standards requiring stormwater treatment and use of low impact development techniques (Sect 9 4) Standards requiring spill prevention and contingency plans, prohibiting development within 100 ft of sensitive area (Sect 9.12) Prohibition of commercial hazardous waste facilities in shoreline jurisdiction (Sect. 8). Standards controlling use of pesticides (Sect. 9.10.D Use standards for buffers (Sect. 8), stormwater treatment required (Sect. 9.4) Mitigation requirements that include addition of LWD (Sect. 9.10) Section 7.7.C. Buffer designations Widening of buffer from 50ft currently to 125 ft to accommodate eventual levee setback (Section 7.6.C, and standards for flood hazard reduction (Section 9.5) requiring 2.5:1 slope, vegetated mid -slope bench, which will create shallow water areas along levee in high water. 2 S.W W: /Long Range Project/Shoreline /Cumulative Impacts /Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009 /GIPAA No Net Loss Table Cumul Impact changes accepted, 12/09/2009 Slight improvement when levee is rebuilt allowing for planting overhanging vegetation and trees on mid -slope bench. Improvement due to SMP standards and new stormwater regulations to comply with City's NPDES permit Improvement when site redevelops LWD will be incorporated into new off channel habitat area (see below) and trees will be planted on mid -slope bench when levee rebuilt. No change (due to levee maintenance to prevent large trees) Eventual improvement in over -water vegetation/shading when levee reconstruction completed and mid -slope bench is planted (including over hanging vegetation) and vegetation matures When levee is reconstructed, some fish and wildlife habitat will be created by planting on the mid -slope bench. Through mitigation for site development, owner will carry out off channel salmon habitat area of 8 acres (6 upland, 2 open water) and tributary stream improvements, including riparian vegetation and more fish friendly culvert and flap gate. Tukwila SMP Cumulative Impact Analysis Risks to Ecosystem Functions and Proposed Standards to Prevent Net Loss, G2 -PAA Reach and Shoreline Ecosystem Function Risks Methods in proposed SMP to prevent loss or minimize risk` Designation (actions that would cause a net loss) Current Land Use: water dependent (boat building, marina, marine industrial) and non -water dependent industrial (Seattle City Light substation) Reach: G2 -PAA Designation: High Intensity Possible redevelopment potential adjacent to Hamm Creek Restoration site on north). No levees, some bulkheads and armored banks. Two salmon habitat restoration projects in reach: Harem Creek and Seattle Fleets and Facilities mitigation site. Hydrology Channel/Flood Plain Interaction: Surface storage, reducing downstream flooding, habitat forming processes, hyporheic functions Current situation: channel constrained by armoring and bulkheads except where Hamm Creek was restored and flows into river and newly restored site on south side of Seattle City Light property Hydrology Groundwater Recharge Current situation: not a significant function, river valley is a groundwater discharge area Sediment Delivery fluvial transport Current situation: not a significant function process controlled and affected at watershed level upriver from Tukwila Sediment Delivery and Removal upland fine sediment generation and particulate retention Current situation: fine sediment could enter river from tributaries, unpaved parcels, and parking lots and very little riparian vegetation, and narrow buffers preclude retention of particulates New or rebuilt/maintained bulkheads, new shoreline armoring on over- steepened banks New overwater /in -water structures Filling loss of newly created wetlands fish and wildlife habitat areas No significant risks No significant risks for coarse sediment transport impairment Land clearing, removal of vegetation, landslides from over steepened banks, bank stabilization projects without adequate erosion controls Increased impervious surface in buffer w/o possible retention by vegetation Inadequate stormwater treatment to remove fine sediment and particulates Incentive for re- sloping and bioengineered bank to a 3:1 slope plus 20 ft setback (in exchange for buffer reduction maximum buffer reduction allowed is 50ft, which would still provide for a wider channel width). (Sect. 7.8.B.) Standards controlling new hard armoring (Sect. 9.5, 9.6) Analysis of potential environmental impacts, mitigation sequencing, and mitigation (Sect. 9.8 of SMP) apply to all projects in the Shoreline Jurisdiction 1 Standards controlling extent and design of new over -water structures (Sec 9.12), mitigation required (Sect. 9 12) Sensitive areas provisions in SMP to prevent filling, other impacts (Sect 10) N/A N /A- Standards requiring adequate stormwater treatment (Sect. 9 4) and increased minimum buffer width (Sect. 7). Also, new stormwater regulations under development to meet new NPDES requirements. Standards for land clearing in SMP (Sect. 9.11), including erosion sediment control for projects. Increased buffer width from 50 (current) to 100 R for new development (Sect 7.8.B). Restrictions on what structures can be built in buffer (Sect 8) Possible buffer reduction in exchange for re- sloping and vegetating bank no greater than 50 Standards prohibiting native vegetation removal and requiring planting of native vegetation (Sect 9 10). Standards for bank stabilization projects (Sect. 9.6) S. W W: /Long Range Projects /Shoreline/Cumulative Impacts/Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009 /G2PAA No Net Loss Table Cutnul Impact changes accepted 12/09/2009 Net Impact Expected from Implementation of regulatory provisions of SMP Slight improvement wider channel width on sites that re- slope bank and use bioengineering techniques, unless new water dependent uses go in. No change if existing water dependent uses stay. Increased channel width would increase flood storage, create a larger intertidal zone and provide a more natural transition from aquatic to upland habitats. No change to existing wetland and fish and wildlife habitat projects installed as restoration. No change No change Significant improvement in water Section 7.8.B. Establishment of quality mainly due to City's new River Buffer stormwater regulations (under Vegetation enhancement at time development now). of re- development as noted above Slight improvement in water quality due to new buffer width No change in buffer width over existing buffer requirements, but significantly improved riparian quality, if buffer reduction granted. Decrease in fine sediment from Opportunities provided for in SMP for restoration of functions Mitigation projects to off -set or replace lost functions Transition Zone is highest priority for restoration projects and to direct off -site mitigation efforts each and Shoreline Ecosystem Function Risks Designation (actions that would cause a net Loss) Water Quality nutrient retention and removal (phosphorous through filtration and retention and nitrogen removal through denitrification) Current situation —very little riparian vegetation present in reach Water Quality Temperature Current situation: high temperature is problem for salmonids little riparian vegetation in this reach, except for recent restoration projects and no large trees currently Water Quality contaminants Current situation: existing industrial uses, existing impervious surfaces many of which do not have stornnvater treatment and are not tied into the City's system,- buildings and parking (about 2/3 of Shoreline Jurisdiction and some vacant, unpaved land about I/3 ofjurisdiction; structures in buffer). Further reduction of river /floodplain interface through hard armoring on over steepened banks Removal of trees and native vegetation and reduction of floodplain area. Vegetation in the floodplain contributes to the retention of phosphorous from the trapping of sediment and denitrification of nitrate -N within the groundwater and surface waters Removal of large trees vegetation that overhangs water (elimination of shading) Increase in impervious surfaces (stormwater temperatures) Reduction in groundwater discharge and base flows New impervious surfaces in buffer (i.e., no filtering out of contaminants) and in contributing watershed Untreated stormwater runoff Overwater structures (such as marinas or boat yards) with transport, use or storage of hazardous materials Use/storage of hazardous materials Parking in buffer or parking in areas without adequate stormwater treatment (oil drips) Methods in proposed SMP to prevent loss or minimize risk' Standards prohibiting new hard armoring, unless studies show no alternatives (in that case mitigation would be required) (Sect. 9.5, 9.6) Standards prohibiting native vegetation and tree removal (Sect 9.10). Standards that prohibit tree removal with mitigation required (Sect 9.10) Standards controlling structures in buffer requiring mitigation (Sect. 8, 9.2), prohibiting increase in runoff and requiring LID techniques (Sect 9.4) Standards controlling structures in buffer requiring mitigation (Sect. 8, 9.2), prohibiting increase in runoff and requiring LID techniques (Sect 9.4) Standards requiring stormwater treatment and use of low impact development techniques (Sect 9.4). Also, new stormwater regulations under development responding to new NPDES permit requirements. Standards requiring spill prevention and contingency plans, prohibiting development within 100 ft of sensitive area (Sect 9.12). Also, new stormwater regulations under development responding to new NPDES permit requirements Standards that limit use of treated pilings (Sect 9.12). Prohibition of commercial hazardous waste facilities in shoreline jurisdiction (Sect. 8). Use standards for buffers (Sect. 8), stonnwater treatment required (Sect. 9.4). Also, new stormwater regulations under development responding to new NPDES permit requirements 2 S. W W: /Long Range Projects/Shoreline /Cumulative Impacts/Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009 /G2PAA No Net Loss Table Cumul Impact changes accepted 12/09/2009 Net Impact Expected from Implementation of regulatory provisions of SMP landslides if banks are re- sloped to 3:1. Improvement in riparian vegetation and in sediment and particulate retention Significant improvement in water quality mainly due to City's new stormwater regulations (under development now). Slight improvement in water quality due to new buffer widths and vegetation requirements (including replacement tree plantings in transition zone). Opportunities provided for in SMP for restoration of functions Restoration projects Laying back banks Installation of native vegetation that overhangs banks Reach and Shoreline Ecosystem Function Risks Methods in proposed SMP to prevent Toss or minimize risk' Designation (actions that would cause a net loss) LWD /Organic inputs Large tree removal (Current situation: no large trees, little overhanging vegetation in the reach) Riparian buffers and over- Insufficient width for adequate buffer function Requirements to increase current buffer of 50ft to 100 ft (Sect 7.8.B) water vegetation (Current situation: narrow to non existent buffers, little riparian vegetation except in restored sites)s In- stream habitat for fish and wildlife (especially for salmonids and bull trout). Freshwater /Saltwater Transition Zone with off channel habitat Current situation: little in- stream habitat except for two small restoration sites that created riparian wetland and shallow water habitat. This area contains the turning basin, which is regularly dredged by the Corps of Engineers thus opportunity to create in- stream habitat is limited. Bulkheads and impervious surface New in/overwater structures with impacts on fish passage, shading, habitat disruption Filling of riparian wetland, off channel habitat Standards prohibiting native vegetation removal, tree removal and requirements for planting native vegetation (Sect 9.10). Mitigation requirements that include addition of LWD to shoreline ecosystem (Sect. 9.10) Possible buffer reduction allowed in exchange for re- sloping and vegetating bank (no more than 50% reduction allowed, but significant improvement in riparian condition Standards for in -water and overwater structures, requirement for special studies to show no net loss, mitigation requirements (Sect. 9.12) Prohibition of wetland filling, protection of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (Sect. 10) 3 S. W W: /Long Range Projects /Shoreline/Cumulative Impacts/Final Cumulative Impacts Analysis Dec 2009 /G2PAA No Net Loss Table Cumul Impact changes accepted 12/09/2009 Net Impact Expected from Implementation of regulatory provisions of SMP No change from current tree removal prohibition. Significant improved riparian vegetation and trees over long- term for properties that redevelop Significant improvement in riparian buffers if sites redevelop. Even with buffer reduction, there will be no change in buffer width but significant improvement in bank stability and riparian vegetation. Improved conditions for salmonids if new overwater structures built or old ones are upgraded. Fish and Wildlife habitat restoration areas protected Opportunities provided for in SMP for restoration of functions Adding LWD to reaches as mitigation and as part of development projects Restoration projects prioritized in transition zone esp. off channel and near channel areas Laying back and vegetating river banks with native plants 72 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, APPROVING AND ADOPTING A SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE FOR THE CITY OF TUKWILA TO INCORPORATE NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS; REPEALING THE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM ADOPTED BY REFERENCE IN SECTION 5 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ADOPTED IN SECTION 1.A OF ORDINANCE NO. 1757; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the goals and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County County-wide Planning Policies; and WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State regulated pursuant to RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila, and WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995 Comprehensive Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the State Legislature has found that shorelines of the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and unrestricted construction on privately and publicly -owned shorelines of the State is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020 the State Legislature directed local governments developing Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give preference to the following uses, in order of preference, which: 1) recognize and protect the State -wide interest over local interest; 2) preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3) result in long -term over short -term benefit; 4) protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public access to publicly -owned areas of shorelines; 6) increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and 7) provide for any other element, as defined in RCW 90.58.100, deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) adopted new rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, to carry out provisions of the Shoreline Management Act; and WHEREAS, DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules provide direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines of the State; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their shoreline master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by DOE, in accordance with a schedule established in that section; and WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of Tukwila to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998, established a Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance, prepared background studies and used consultant services to prepare technical documents; and WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master Program in 2008; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline Master Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," an "Inventory and Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a Determination of Non Significance was issued August 13, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9, 2008 to allow W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Master Program Adoption.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 1 of 2 73 74 additional public input, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to the City Council in February 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the hearing to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009 and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to review the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 173 -26 -186, City staff has analyzed the cumulative impacts of the staff draft Shoreline Master Program, the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program, and the Council revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program and determined that the Shoreline Master Program and accompanying goals, policies and regulations will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, as compared to current "baseline" conditions; and WHEREAS, pursuant to WAC 173 -26 -186, the proposed Shoreline Master Program contains policies and regulations to ensure to net loss of shoreline ecological functions, to address adverse cumulative impacts and to fairly allocate the burden of addressing cumulative impacts among development opportunities; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program to address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers, staff and the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a variety of methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including mailings to property owners and tenants, notice boards along the Green River Trail, postings on the City's web site, creation of a broadcast email group who received updates of the shoreline review process and articles irk the City's newsletter; and WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Shoreline Master Program Established. The Shoreline Master Program, with accompanying maps set forth in "Attachment A," is hereby adopted and shall become binding as of the effective date of this ordinance on all properties within the shoreline jurisdiction. Section 2. Repealer. The Shoreline Master Program, adopted by reference in Section 5 of the 1995 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in Section 1.A of Ordinance No. 1757, is hereby repealed. Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force and effect on the later of five days after passage and publication as provided by law, or approval of the Shoreline Master Program set forth in "Attachment A" by the Washington State Department of Ecology. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009. ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY Office of the City Attorney W. \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Master Program Adoptlon.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Attachment: "Attachment A" Shoreline Master Program Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Page 2 of 2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Current Tukwila SMP Shoreline Management Zones (1974 SMP; TMC 18.44) 46 Figure 2. Minimum Levee Profile 57 Figure 3. Schematic of Shoreline Residential Environment and Buffer 60 Figure 4. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas without Levees 62 Figure 5. Schematic of Buffer Reduction Through Placing of Fill on Levee Back Slope 64 Figure 6. Schematic of Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffers for the Urban Conservancy Environment in Areas with Levees 64 Figure 7. Schematic Showing the Proposed Shoreline Jurisdiction and Buffer for the High Intensity Environment 66 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. General Restoration Potential within the Shorelines of Tukwila 28 Table 2. State Recommended Environment Designation System WAC 173 -26 -211 (5) 48 Table 3. Summary of Buffer Widths for Land Use Zones and Shoreline Ecological Conditions 50 Table 4. Tree Replacement Requirements 87 Table 5. River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities 91 96 LIST OF MAPS Map 1. Potential Annexation Areas Map 2. Transition Zone Map 3. Annexation History Map 4. Proposed Shoreline Environments Map 5. Shoreline Armoring Map 6 Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Map 7. Shoreline Public Access APPENDICES A. Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report B. Shoreline Restoration Plan CL v 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W:\Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 75 76 Mean Higher High Water (MHHW): means the average of the higher high water height of each tidal day, and used in determining the OHWM for the tidally influenced portions of the river. Native Vegetation: means vegetation with a genetic origin of Western Washington, Northern Oregon and Southern British Columbia, not including cultivars. No Net Loss: means a standard intended to ensure that shoreline development or uses, whether permitted or exempt, are located and designed to avoid loss or degradation of shoreline ecological functions that are necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. Nonconforming: means a use or development which was lawfully constructed or established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or the Shoreline Master Program or amendments thereto, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program. Non water oriented uses: means those uses that are not water dependent, water related, or water enjoyment. Ordinary high water mark: means that mark that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters (all lakes, streams, and tidal water) are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or the Department of Ecology. In any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean high water. Overwater Structure: means any device or structure projecting over the OHWM, including, but not limited to bridges, boat lifts, wharves, piers, docks, ramps, floats or buoys. Non conforming Structure: means a structure legally established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Master Program, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program. Non conforming Use: means a use legally established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Master Program, but which does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program. Public Access: means the ability of the general public to reach, touch or enjoy the water's edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations. Public access may be provided by an owner by easement, CL 12 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 covenant, or similar legal agreement of substantial walkways, corridors, parks, or other areas serving as a means of view and/or physical approach to public waters. The Director may approve limiting public access as to hours of availability, types of activity permitted, location and area. Regional Detention Facility: means a stormwater detention and/or retention facility that accepts flow from multiple parcels and/or public ROW. The facility may be public or private. Revetment: means a sloping structure built to increase bank strength and protect an embankment, or shore against erosion by waves or river currents. A revetment is usually built of rock rip -rap, wood, or poured concrete. One or more filter layers of smaller rock or filter cloth and "toe" protection are included. A revetment typically slopes and has a rough or jagged face. The slope differentiates it from a bulkhead, which is a vertical structure. Riparian: means the land along the margins of rivers and streams. Riverbank analysis and report: means a scientific study or evaluation conducted by qualified experts and the resulting report to evaluate the ground and/or surface hydrology and geology, the geomorphology and hydraulic characteristics of the river, the affected land form and its susceptibility to mass wasting, erosion, scouring and other geologic hazards or fluvial processes. The report shall include conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of the proposed development on geologic and/or hydraulic conditions, the adequacy of the site to be developed, the impacts of the proposed development, alternative approaches to the proposed development, and measures to mitigate potential site specific and cumulative geological, hydrological and hydraulic impacts of the proposed development, including the potential adverse impacts to adjacent and down current properties. GeotechnicaUHydrological /Hydraulic reports shall conform to accepted technical standards and must be prepared by qualified professional engineers or geologists who have professional expertise about the regional and local shoreline geology and processes. Shorelands or shoreland areas: means those lands extending landward for two hundred feet in all directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high watermark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the SMA. Shoreline areas and shoreline jurisdiction: means all "shorelines of the state" and "shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030. Shoreline functions: see Ecological functions. Shoreline Jurisdiction: means the channel of the Green/Duwamish River, its banks, the CL 13 12/03/2009 10:31:00 AM W\Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 77 78 6. SHORELINE GOALS AND POLICIES The goals and policies listed below are taken from the City's 1995 Comprehensive Plan. Strikeout/underlining has been used to indicate proposed revisions to the original 1995 text to reflect changed circumstances or newer requirements. The goals and policies are found in Chapter 5 of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan will be amended to reflect these changes to goals and policies. 6.1 Shoreline Environment Designations. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.1 Goal: Shoreline Environment designations that meet Washington State Shoreline Management Act requirements, and reflect local conditions and Tukwila's long -term vision for its shoreline. The shoreline jurisdiction generally extends for 200 feet on either side of the Ordinary High Water mark, consistent with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act. In order to implement this goal, the SMP proposes three Environment Designations: Shoreline Residential, Urban Conservancy, and High Intensity (as detailed in the Shoreline Environment Section) that comply with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act and function well for the City. Policies: Policy 5.1.1: Shoreline Residential Environment. In the Shoreline Residential Environment, priority shall be given to the following: o Uses that preserve or restore the natural character of the shoreline or promote preservation of vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands; and o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological limitations of the land and water and that will not require extensive alteration of the shoreline or new "hard" structural shoreline stabilization. Where possible the removal of bulkheads, revetments, levees or other "hard" structural shoreline stabilization is required. Hard structural shoreline stabilization may be replaced with alternative bioengineered bank stabilization; and o On publicly owned property, water dependent or water related recreational activities that are compatible with the character of the shoreline residential areas. o Maintenance of existing single family residential development patterns and public open space and recreation uses; o Residential and recreational development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and maintenance of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions; o Residential and recreational development that contributes to the restoration of ecological functions over time in areas where ecological degradation has occurred. CL 33 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W: \Shoreline \Council Review\\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 Policy 5.1.2, Urban Conservancy Environment: In the Urban Conservancy Environment priority shall be given to the following: o Development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. o Water enjoyment uses o Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline dependent use, and uses that prevent and/or minimize flood damage; o Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands; o Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control, consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on migration; o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated; o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for restoration projects. o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated; o Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and o Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of commercial and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are minimized and where there is no net loss of shoreline functions. Policy 5.1.3, High Intensity Shoreline Environment: In the High Intensity Environment, priority shall be given to the following: o Water dependent commercial and industrial uses; o Development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. o Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline dependent use, and uses that prevent and/or minimize flood damage; o Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands; o Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control, consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on migration; o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated; CL 34 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W' \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 79 80 o Development that is compatible with the natural and biological limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for restoration proj ects. o Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated; o Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and o Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of intensive commercial and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are minimized and where there is no net loss of shoreline functions. 6.2 Shoreline Planninn and Management. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.2 Goal: Expanded value of the river as a community and regional resource through regional coordination of shoreline management programs and through programs that foster river appreciation and awareness, involving partnerships among businesses, schools, government and community organizations. Policies: Policy 5.2.1: Coordinate shoreline planning and management activities with other local jurisdictions and their plans such as the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan and the King County Flood Hazard Management Plan to establish region -wide consistency in addressing river issues with regional implications, such as economic development, public access, wildlife habitat, water quality control and flood control. Policy 5.2.2: Promote river stewardship and increase river awareness through actions which further shoreline goals, such as educational programs, community activities, and partnerships with Tukwila residents, businesses, schools, government, and community organizations. Policy 5.2.3: Promote and participate in the implementation of the Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan, including supporting the recommended projects located in Tukwila to improve the habitat functions of the Green/Duwamish River, as well as the Plan policies and goals. C. Implementation Strategies: WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan Tukwila SMP Restoration Plan King County Flood Hazard Management Plan ct 35 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W\Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 6.3 Land Development Use and Economic Vitality, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.3 Goal: Development along the shoreline that fosters the economic vitality of Tukwila while preserving the long -term benefits of the river. Policies: Policy 5.3.1: Implement Shoreline Design Guidelines to: o Encourage design that views the river as an amenity; o Guide the design of multiple shoreline uses; o Establish techniques for increasing multiple shoreline use; o Prioritize locations for use; o Encourage removal of invasive species with nonchemical methods and maintenance of native planted vegetation to minimize the presence of invasive species. Policy 5.3.2: Design and locate all shoreline development to minimize impacts on areas identified as important for other river uses, such as wildlife and aquatic habitat, river vegetation, public access and recreation, historical resource and flood control. Policy 5.3.3: When 110 other feasible alternative exists, allow structures for water dependent uses to be placed in the water, or structural reinforcement of the riverbank, only when this provides a significant, long -term public benefit, does not interfere with navigation or flood management, does not cause a loss of shoreline function or is essential to a water dependent use. Policy 5.3.4: Prohibit the construction of new flood control facilities unless constructed to incorporate habitat restoration features and work to remove existing shoreline armoring where possible— to restore habitat functions. Policy 5.3.5: Recognize and promote the river's contribution to the economic vitality of Tukwila, as a valuable amenity for existing and future businesses which depend on or benefit from a shoreline location. Policy 5.3.6: Ensure that shoreline development does not diminish the commercial navigability of the River. Policy 5.3.7: Tukwila Urban Center Development Policy: Design and locate shoreline development in the Tukwila Urban Center to encourage water enjoyment uses that: o Provide for shoreline multiple uses that are consistent with the underlying zoning; CL 36 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W: \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 81 82 o Provide additional benefits, such as riverbank restoration, fishing piers, non motorized boat launches, river views, or interpretive signs; o Support public access to and along the shoreline; o Provide water enjoyment uses as transitions between the river and non -water dependent uses; o Encourage efficient use of land, through such techniques as clustering, mixed use projects, cooperative parking or parking located under principal structures, and shared utility and access corridors. o Ensure that new development and re- development in the Urban Center acknowledges the goal of a continuous street facade along Christensen Road and the riverfront and locates parking facilities to the interior of the lot. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.3.7: o Shoreline Design Guidelines o Development Standards o Tukwila Urban Center Plan MIC Development Policy 5.3.8: Ensure that non -water dependent shoreline development in the MIC provides for shoreline multiple uses to the extent that site security and the success of industrial operations are not jeopardized; ensures no net loss of shoreline function and provides adequate mitigation for the loss of shoreline multiple use opportunities. MIC Development Policy 5.3.9: Allow opportunities for commercial and recreational marinas to locate in Tukwila downstream of the turning basin, where compatible with existing and future navigability and existing and future ecological restoration projects. Policy 5.3.10: Development outside the Tukwila Urban Center or MIC: Design and locate shoreline development outside of the Tukwila Urban Center and the MIC to: o Provide for multiple shoreline uses; o Provide water enjoyment uses as transitions between the river and non -water dependent uses; o Encourage efficient use of land through such techniques as clustering, mixed -use projects, cooperative parking or parking located under principal structures, and shared utility and access corridors; o Treat the river as an amenity in the design and location of the project. 6.4 Private Pronertv Riehts, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.4 Goal: Protect rights of property owners to reasonable use and enjoyment of private CL 37 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W\Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 property, through appropriate location, access to, and design of shoreline uses. Policies Policy 5.4.1: Design, locate and manage shoreline uses in a manner which maintains reasonable use and enjoyment of private property. Policy5.4.2: Design and locate public access in a way that is appropriate for the site, depending on site conditions and private property concerns. Policy 5.4.3: Special sensitivity is required for residential property; therefore, all single family residential development of four or fewer single family residential lots is excluded from requirements to provide private or public access. Single family property owners are not exempt from the responsibility to improve the habitat value of the shoreline environment. Policy 5.4.4. Maintain flexibility in methods of obtaining public access, to allow for different site conditions and private property concerns that might conflict with public access, such as privacy, safety, and security. Policy 5.4.5: Obtain additional easement area to permit the improvement of flood control and river habitat by setting back levees or removing revetments and other hard shoreline armoring and replacing with more habitat friendly flood control levees or other shoreline treatment. 6.5 Shoreline Design Ouality, Comnrehensive Plan Goal 5.5 Goal: Enhanced identity of the river as a unique community asset through high quality development and public activities that reflect Tukwila's history and sense of community pride. Policies: Policy 5.5.1: Require that shoreline development outside of the MIC: o Ensures no net loss of shoreline function; o Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design Guidelines; o Reflects principles of high quality design, in such areas as site planning, architecture and landscaping; o Includes setbacks, bulk, height, density, landscape buffers and provisions for open space that enhance the shoreline environment. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.5.1: o Shoreline design guidelines o Shoreline development standards o Tukwila Urban Center Plan Policy 5.5.2: Require that shoreline development in the MIC: CL 38 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W\Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 83 84 o Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design Guidelines; o Maintains or enhances the existing visual quality along the river; o Provides trees and other landscaping to buffer industrial uses that are incompatible with other river uses; o Provides amenities that enhance enjoyment of the river by employees. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.5.2: o Shoreline design guidelines o Shoreline development standards 6.6 Access and Recreational Use, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.6 Goal: Increase the amount and diversity of opportunities for public recreation and access to and along the river, including visual and cultural access, access to the water's edge, opportunities for small boat navigation and access, and connections to other neighborhoods, consistent with the shoreline character. Policies: Policy 5.6.1: Retain and improve areas identified as important in the network of public access to the river, including cross -town connections, former railroad right -of -ways and unimproved street -end right -of -ways, historic sites, unique natural features or other areas valuable for their interpretive potential. Policy 5.6.2: Maintain existing parks along the shoreline and acquire additional park land to increase access and recreation opportunities. Policy 5.6.3: Incorporate river access requirements to guide the design, location and management of shoreline public access in short plats over 4 lots and all subdivisions as well as multi family, commercial and industrial development; to identify types of access appropriate and feasible for various site conditions and locations; and to establish strategies, funding sources and priorities for acquisition and enhancement of shoreline public access. Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.1- 5.6.3: o Shoreline design guidelines o Shoreline access guidelines o Shoreline development standards o Walk and Roll Plan o Parks and Open Space Plan Policy 5.6.4: Design, locate and manage public access for diverse types and variable levels of intensity in order to minimize impacts on vulnerable features of the natural environment and to minimize conflicts with private CL 39 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W\Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 property uses. Policy 5.6.5: Where shoreline development provides public access areas, reserve such areas for use by the public through the means most appropriate for the type, scale and impacts of the development, such as dedication, donation or sale of an easement or right -of -way to the City. Policy 5.6.6: Support the implementation of the King County Green River Trail, per the existing King County Green River Trail Master Plan as well as pedestrian/bicycle connections with the Trail from properties on the opposite bank and the expansion of this trail where appropriate. Policies for Development outside MIC: Policy 5.6.7: Require subdivisions, multi family residential uses and commercial and industrial uses along the shoreline to provide a trail for public access along the river in areas identified for trail connections, consistent with the King County Green River Trail Master Plan, Shoreline Master Program or any other approved access plan. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.7 o King County Green River Trail Master Plan o Shoreline public access standards o Walk and Roll Plan o Parks and Open Space Plan Policy 5.6.8: Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access, and appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.8 o King County Green River Trail Master Plan o Shoreline public access standards o Walk and Roll Plan o Parks and Open Space Plan Policy 5.6.9: Except for single family residential development of four or fewer single family residential lots, shoreline development shall maintain and encourage views of the water from the shoreline and from upland area, through design of building height, bulk and modulation, and windows, breezeways and outdoor spaces. Implementation Strategies CL 40 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 85 86 o Shoreline design guidelines Policy 5.6.10: Public access improvements should be designed and constructed to: o Look and "feel" welcoming to the public; o Connect to public areas, street ends, and other pedestrian or public throughfares; o Enhance the character of Tukwila; o Avoid conflicts with water dependent uses; o Provide for public safety and minimize impacts to private property and individual privacy and security; o Require a low level of operation and maintenance; o Ensure that construction (i.e. structures and access pathways) incorporates environmentally sensitive design and materials (e.g., non- toxic, natural materials) Policy 5.6.11: Improve pedestrian connections between the river, Green River Trail and the Urban Center's commercial, office and residential uses. Policies for Development in MIC Policy 5.6.12: For MIC properties included in the King County Green River Trail Master Plan or other approved access plan, require shoreline development to provide a trail for public access along the river. Policy 5.6.13: Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access and appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines. Policy 5.6.14: For MIC properties not included in the King County Green River Trail Plan, require shoreline development to provide public access or a private natural area in lieu of public access, or otherwise mitigate the loss of public access. Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.12 -14 o Shoreline design guidelines o Shoreline access guidelines o Walk and Roll Plan o Parks and Open Space 6.7 Transportation within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.7 Goal: Safe corridors and amenities for pedestrians, cyclists and users of public transportation, allowing more citizens to access and enjoy the river. CL 41 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 Policies: Policies Policy 5.7.1: Design and locate transportation uses within the shoreline jurisdiction to be compatible with shoreline vegetation or other habitat features, turn-outs or parking areas for public access, biofiltration swales to protect water quality, public art or interpretive signs. Policy 5 7 2• Ensure the transportation uses within the shoreline jurisdiction and within those corridors identified as river cross connections provide safe, convenient and attractive pedestrian, bicycle and boater access and facilities for public transportation. Policy 5.7.3: Minimize transportation impacts to the natural environment (such as air, noise, odor or water pollution) and enhance the natural environment wherever possible through planting trees and other habitat features. Policy 5.7.4: Encourage maintenance of the river's navigability up to the Turning Basin, where this achieves a greater public interest and a balance between costs and benefits to the broader community and impacts to the habitat functions of the river, in recognition of the historical significance of navigation and its importance to the economic vitality of water dependent uses and the MIC 6.8 Historical Resource Use and Archaeological Protection. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.8 Goal: Recognition of the river's contribution to Tukwila history and community identity through identification, enhancement, restoration, and protection of sites with historic and cultural value and through development of interpretive and educational programs. Policy 5.8.1: Ensure that shoreline development reflects the river's important role in Tukwila's history and that long -term public use of the river as an historical resource is protected by providing for the identification, protection and interpretation of unique historic and archaeological features. Policy 5.8.2: Ensure that public shoreline development reflects the river's natural features and community traditions. Policy 5.8.3: Ensure that archaeological artifacts and sites are protected when development takes place in the shoreline jurisdiction. CL 42 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 87 88 6.9 Natural Environment and Habitat Use, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.9 Goal: Restored, enhanced, and protected natural environment resources along the river, including trees, wildlife habitat and features with value for long -term public, scientific and educational uses. Policies Policy 5.9.1:Ensure that shoreline development results in no net loss of shoreline ecological function, minimizes impacts on wildlife and that significant vegetation, sandbars, wetlands, watercourses, and other critical areas identified as important for habitat are maintained through the proper location, design, construction, and management of all shoreline uses and activities. Policy 5.9.2: Ensure that shoreline development and activities protect riverbank vegetation and, where feasible, restore degraded riverbanks in accordance with the vegetation management provisions of the Shoreline Master Program, in order to minimize and compensate for impacts to fish and wildlife habitat. Policy 5.9.3: Mitigate unavoidable disturbances of significant vegetation or habitat through replacement of habitat and provision of interpretive features consistent with the shoreline access guidelines. Policy 5.9.4: Support relief from certain shoreline master program requirements for properties affected by habitat restoration projects that result in the movement of the ordinary high water mark. Policy 5.9.5: Support establishing the Transition Zone as the priority area for habitat restoration projects given its importance for subtidal and intertidal habitats to allow salmonids to gradually adjust to the change between fresh and saltwater conditions. 6.10 Water Oualitv. Surface Water and Flood Control Use, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.10 Goal: Improved water quality and quantity control programs affecting the Green/Duwamish River that improve the river's water quality, provide habitat for fish and wildlife, protect public health and safety, and enhance public enjoyment of the river. Policies: Policy 5.10.1: Design, locate, and manage shoreline development including streets, flood control projects, surface water drainage and sewer systems, clearing and grading activities, and landscaping in a manner which minimizes opportunities for pollutants to enter the river, provides erosion control and otherwise protects water quality. Policy 5.10.2: Design, manage, and mitigate flood control uses to minimize impacts to other shoreline uses such as trees and riverbank vegetation, public access and recreation, and fish habitat; and set them back from the river, CL 43 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 where feasible for the project, with land areas between the water and the levee set aside as open space for public recreation or wildlife habitat. Policy 5.10.3: Consistent with project feasibility, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts on other shoreline uses owing to flood control uses through such measures as restoration of trees and native riverbank vegetation, provision of public access to the water's edge, interpretive features, or other mitigation of loss of opportunities for shoreline multiple uses. Policy 5.10.4: Obtain additional easements, where needed, from property owners to set back levees to improve flood control and shoreline habitat functions. Where possible, as redevelopment occurs, replace bulkheads, revetments or other hard bank stabilization with more natural levees, riverbanks or other shoreline treatments, to improve flood control, ecological functions and habitat. C. Implementation Strategies Increase levee setback to incorporate flatter, more stable slope and vegetated mid -slope benches Shoreline access guidelines Surface Water Management Plan WRIA 9 Plan water quality policies Shoreline Restoration Plan 6.11 Public Health. Safety and Welfare, Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.11 Goal: Shoreline uses that do not endanger public health, safety and welfare, or the capacity of the river to provide long -term benefits and resources to the community. Policies: Policy 5.11.1: Design, locate, and manage shoreline uses, such as capital improvement projects and private development, in a manner that does not endanger public health, safety and welfare, and enhances the capacity of the river to provide long -term flood protection, habitat and other benefits and resources to the community and the environment. CL 44 12/08/2009 2:54 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 89 90 8. SHORELINE USE REGULATIONS This section specifies the uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional Use, or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment. Also included are special conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These regulations are intended to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment designation adopted with this SMP and will be codified in TMC 18.44. Additional regulations and performance standards that apply to all Shoreline Environments are included in Sections 9 -14 of this SMP. These will also be codified in TMC 18.44. 8.1 General Use Regulations A. All shoreline uses shall meet the requirements listed below. B. The first priority for City -owned property within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be reserved for water dependent uses including but not limited to habitat restoration, followed by water enjoyment uses, public access, passive recreation, passive open space uses, or public educational purposes. C. No hazardous waste handling, processing or storage is allowed within the SMA shoreline jurisdiction, unless incidental to a use allowed in the designated shoreline environment and adequate controls are in place to prevent any releases to the shoreline /river. D. Overwater structures, shall not cause a net loss of ecological function, interfere with navigation or flood management, or present potential hazards to downstream properties or facilities. They shall comply with the standards in the Overwater Structures Section. E. Parking as a primary use is not permitted, except for existing Park and Ride lots, where adequate stormwater collection and treatment is in place to protect water quality. Parking is permitted only as an accessory to a permitted, conditional or unclassified use in the shoreline jurisdiction. F. All development, activities or uses unless it is an approved over water, flood management structure, or shoreline restoration project shall be prohibited waterward of the OHWM. 8.2 Shoreline Residential Environment -Uses A. Shoreline Residential Buffer Permitted Uses The Shoreline Residential River Buffer shall consist of the area identified in the Shoreline Environment Designation Section of the SMP and the uses shall meet the CL 67 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W: \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 purposes and criteria established therein. 1. Permitted Uses: No uses or structures are permitted in the Shoreline Residential Buffer except for the following: a. Shoreline Restoration Projects; b. Over -water structures subject to the standards in the Over -water Structures section associated with water dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control or channel management. Private, single residence piers for the sole use of the property owner shall not be considered an outright use on the shoreline. A dock may be allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage and that the following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or feasible: 1). commercial or marina moorage; 2). floating moorage buoys; 3). joint use moorage pier /dock. c. Public parks, recreation and open space; d. Public pedestrian bridges e. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails; f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height or 25 square feet in area or block views to the shoreline from adjacent properties; g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code; h. Maintenance or redevelopment of levees for flood control purposes, provided they are designed to meet the minimum— annlicable levee regulations of this SMPprofile; i. Vehicle bridges, only if connecting public rights -of -way; j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of refuse; k. Fire lanes when co- located with levee maintenance roads; 1. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline Stabilization section of this SMP. m. Water dependent uses and their structures, as long as there is no net loss of shoreline ecological function; n. Fences, provided the maximum height of a fence along the shoreline is four feet and the fence does not extend waterward beyond the top of the bank; chain link fences must by vinyl coated. o. Existing essential streets, roads and rights of way may be maintained or improved; p. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use. q. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible; CL 68 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W' \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 91 92 8.3 Urban Conservancy Environment Uses The Urban Conservancy Environment shall consist of the areas identified in the Shoreline Environment Designations sections of this SMP. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of the Urban Conservancy Environment established therein. A. Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer Uses 1. Permitted uses: The following uses are permitted in the Urban Conservancy River Buffer: a. Shoreline Restoration Projects. b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over water Structures Section that are associated with water dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or ecological restoration; c. Public parks, recreation and open space d. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails; e. Public pedestrian bridges; f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and 25 square feet in area and views of the shoreline are not blocked from adjacent properties; g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code; h. Maintenance or redevelopment of levees for flood control purposes, provided that any redevelopment of a levee shall meet the minimum applicable levee regulations of this SMPprofilc wherever feasible; i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of- way; existing public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or replaced. j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of refuse; k. Levee maintenance roads; 1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for Landscaping purposes. m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline Stabilization Section. n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights of way may be maintained or improved. o. Water dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the underlying zoning district; p. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter systems and outfalls. CL 70 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 q. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible; r. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use. s. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground. t. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments. 2. Conditional Uses: Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the Shoreline Urban Conservancy Environment buffer subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by this program: a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant ecological impacts are minimized and when mitigation is provided; b. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation is provided. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fill material is prohibited. Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations. c. New private vehicle bridges. B. Urban Conservancy Environment Uses 1. Permitted Uses: All uses permitted in the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer and/or the underlying zoning district may be allowed. 2. Conditional Uses: All uses listed as Conditional Uses may be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions of this program. 8.4 Hi &h Intensity Environment Uses The High Intensity Environment Buffer shall consist of the area identified in the Shoreline Environment Designations section. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of established therein. A. High Intensity Environment Buffer Uses 1. Permitted uses: The following uses are permitted in the High Intensity River Buffer: a. Shoreline Restoration Projects. b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over water Structures Section that are associated with water dependent CL 71 12/08/2009 2.54:00 PM W\Shoreline \Council Review\1Document \Council SNIP 12 -7 -09 93 94 uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or ecological restoration; c. Public parks, recreation and open space; d. Public and/or private promenades, footpaths or trails; e. Public pedestrian bridges; f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and 25 square feet in area and no views of the shoreline are blocked from adjacent properties; g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code; h. Maintenance or redevelopment of levees for flood control purposes, provided that any redevelopment of a levee shall meet the minimum applicable levee regulations of this SMP i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of- way; existing public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or replaced. j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of refuse; k. Levee maintenance roads; 1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for landscaping purposes. m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline Stabilization section of this SMP. n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights of way may be maintained or improved. o. Water dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the underlying zoning district; p. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter systems and outfalls. q. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible; r. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use. s. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground. t. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments. 2. Conditional Uses: Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the Shoreline High Intensity Environment buffer subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions of this program. CL 72 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W: \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 properties and on the river channel, be directed downward so as to illuminate only the immediate area; and be shielded to eliminate direct off -site illumination; 3. The general grounds need not be lighted; 4. The lighting is incorporated into a unified landscape and/or site plan. 9.4 Surface Water and Water Oualitv The following standards apply to all shoreline development. A. New surface water systems may not discharge directly into the river or streams tributary to the river without pre treatment to reduce pollutants and meet State water quality standards. B. Such pre- treatment may consist of biofiltration, oiUwater separators, or other methods approved by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. C. Shoreline development, uses and activities shall not cause any increase in surface runoff, and shall have adequate provisions for storm water detention/infiltration. D. Stormwater outfalls must be designed so as to cause no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or adverse impacts where functions are impaired. New stormwater outfalls or maintenance of existing outfalls must include shoreline restoration as part of the project. E. Shoreline development and activities shall have adequate provisions for sanitary sewer. F. Solid and liquid wastes and untreated effluents shall not be allowed to enter any bodies of water or to be discharged onto shorelands. G. The use of low impact development techniques is required, unless such techniques conflict with other provisions of the SMP or are shown to not be feasible due to site conditions. H. Regional detention facilities shall be designed such that a fence is not required, planted with native vegetation, designed to blend with the surrounding environment and provide design features that serve both public and private use, such as an access road that also can serve as a trail. The facility shall also be designed to locate access roads and other impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical. 9.5 Flood Hazard Reduction The following standards apply to all shoreline development. CL 77 12/03/2009 10:31:00 AM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 95 96 E. Shoreline Variance Permits Waterward of OHWM 1. Shoreline Variance permits for development and/or uses that will be located either waterward of the ordinary high water mark or within any sensitive area may be authorized only if the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: a. That the strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in this Master Program preclude all reasonable permitted use of the property; and b. That the proposal is consistent with the criteria established under D above; and c. The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected by the granting of the variance. 2. In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area such that the total of the variances would remain consistent with RCW 90.58.020 and not cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. 3. Variances from the use regulations of the master program are prohibited. 14.5 Non conforming Development A. Non conforming Uses Any preexisting lawful use of land that would not be allowed under the terms of this SMP may be continued as an allowed, legal non conforming use, so long as that use remains lawful, subject to the following: 1. No such non conforming use shall be enlarged, intensified, increased or extended to occupy a greater use of the land, structure or combination of the two, than was occupied at the effective date of adoption of this SMP; 2. No non conforming use shall be moved or extended in whole or in part to any other portion of the lot or parcel occupied by such use at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this SMP; 3. If any such non conforming use ceases for any reason for a period of more than 24 consecutive months, any subsequent use shall conform to the regulations specified by this SMP for the shoreline environment in which such use is located. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months, per 14.5 C. 4. If a change of use is proposed to a use determined to be non conforming by application of provisions in this SMP, the proposed new use must be a CL 140 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 permitted use in the SMP or a use approved under a Conditional Use Permit process. For purposes of implementing this section, a change of use constitutes a change from one Permitted, Conditional Use category to another such use category as listed within the zoning code. 5. A structure that is being or has been used for a nonconforming use may be used for a different nonconforming use after demonstrating the following criteria have been met: a. No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical; b. The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and provisions of the SMP and as compatible with the uses in the area as the preexisting use; c. The use or activity is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional purpose; d. The structure(s) associated with the non conforming use shall not be expanded in a manner that increases the extent of the nonconformity; e. The change in use will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and/or processes; f The applicant restores and or /enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including but not limited to paved areas no longer in use on the property, to offset the impact of the change of use per the vegetation management standards of this program. This may include the restoration of paved areas to vegetated area if no longer in use. The preference is to reduce exterior uses in the buffer to the maximum extent possible. B. Non conforming Structures Where a lawful structure exists at the effective date of adoption of the SMP that could not be built under the terms of the SMP by reason of restrictions on height, buffers or other characteristics of the structure, it may be continued as an allowed, legal structure so long as the structure remains otherwise lawful subject to the following provisions: 1. No such structure may be enlarged or altered in such a way that increases its degree of nonconformity or increases its impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline environment. Ordinary maintenance and repair of and upgrades to a non- confouning structure is permitted, including but not limited to painting, roof repair and replacement, plumbing, wiring, mechanical equipment repair /replacement, repaving and weatherization. These and other alterations, additions or enlargements may be allowed as long as the work done does not extend further into any required buffer, increase the amount of impervious surface, or increase the impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline environment. Complete plans shall be required of all work contemplated under this section. 2. Should such structure be destroyed by any accidental means the structure may CL 141 12/09/2009 12:23:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 97 98 be reconstructed to its original dimensions and location on the lot provided application is made for permits within twelve (12) months of the date the damage occurred and all reconstruction is completed within two years of permit issuance. In the event that the property is redeveloped, such redevelopment must be in conformity with the provisions of this SMP. 3. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distance whatsoever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations of this SMP after it is moved. 4. When a non conforming structure, or structure and premises in combination, is vacated or abandoned for 24 consecutive months, the structure, or structure and premises in combination, shall thereafter be required to be in conformance with the regulations of the SMP. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months, and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months per 14.5 C. 5. Residential structures and uses located in any single family or multiple family residential zoning district and in existence at the time of adoption of this SMP shall not be deemed nonconforming in terms of height, use, or location provisions of this title. Such buildings may be rebuilt after a fire or other natural disaster to their original dimensions, location and height, but may not be changed except as provided in the non conforming uses section of this chapter. 6. Single family structures in single- or multiple family residential zone districts, which have legally non conforming setbacks from the OHWM per the SMP buffer, shall be allowed to expand the ground floor only along the existing building line(s), so long as the existing distance from the nearest point of the structure to the OHWM is not reduced, and the square footage of new intrusion into the buffer does not exceed 50% of the square footage of the current intrusion. As a condition of building permit approval a landscape plan showing removal of invasive plant species within the entire shoreline buffer and replanting with appropriate native species must be submitted to the City. Maintenance of these plantings through the establishment period is recommended. 7. Within the shoreline jurisdiction, existing structures that do not meet the requirements of the SMP may be altered or iartially reconstructed er replaced, provided that: a. The new construction is within the original dimensions and location on the lot; b. The new construction does not further intrude into or adversely impact the required buffer; c. The use or activity within the structure is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the minimum amount necessary to achieve CL 142 12/09/2009 12:23:00 PM W:\Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 the intended functional purpose; d. The reconstruction will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and/or processes; e. For properties in non leveed portions of the river, the applicant re- slopes the bank to a 2.5:1 or 3:1 angle as appropriate for the shoreline environment designation and restores and/or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including but not limited to paved areas no longer in use on the property. Where an existing building would prevent the re- sloping of the bank to 2.5:1 or 3:1 as applicable, the applicant must re -slope to the extent possible, remove invasive vegetation and re- vegetate according to the provisions in section 9.10. For properties behind levees that do not meet the minimum profile, restore and/or enhance the remaining buffer area and remove invasive vegetation and plant with native vegetation on the levee prism as permitted by the COE. For the purposes of this section, alteredation is—or partially reconstructed is defined as work that does not exceeds 50% of the assessed valuation of the building over a three year period. 8. A non conforming —use, within a non conforming structure, shall not be allowed to expand into any other portion of the structure. C. Requests for Time Extension Nonconforming Uses and Structures A property owner may request, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months, an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months. Such a request may be approved only when: 1. For a nonconforming use, a finding is made that no reasonable alternative conforming use is practical; 2. For a nonconforming structure, special economic circumstances prevent the lease or sale of said structure within 24 months; and 3. The applicant restores and/or enhances the shoreline buffer on the property to offset the impact of the continuation of the pre existing use. For nonconforming uses, the amount of buffer to be restored and/or enhanced will be determined based on the percentage of the existing building used by the nonconforming use for which a time extension is being requested. Depending on the size of the area to be restored and/or enhanced, the Director may require targeted plantings rather than a linear planting arrangement. The vegetation management standards of this Program shall be used for guidance on any restoration/enhancement. For nonconforming structures, for each six month extension of time requested, 15% of the available buffer must be restored/enhanced. CL 143 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 99 1 00 Conditions may be attached to the permit that are deemed necessary to assure compliance with the above findings, the requirements of the master program and the Shoreline Management Act and to assure that the use will not become a nuisance or a hazard. D. Building Safety Nothing in this SMP shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of any non conforming building or part thereof declared to be unsafe by order of any City official charged with protecting the public safety. 1. Alterations or expansion of a non conforming structure, that are required by law or a public agency in order to comply with public health or safety regulations are the only alterations or expansions allowed. 2. Alterations or expansions permitted under this section shall be the minimum necessary to meet the public safety concerns. E. Non conforming Parking Lots 1. Nothing contained in this SMP shall be construed to require a change in any aspect of a structure or facility covered thereunder including, without limitation, parking lot layout, loading space requirements and curb -cuts, for any structure or facility which existed on the date of adoption of this SMP. 2. If a change of use takes place, or an addition is proposed, which requires an increase in the parking area by an increment less than 100 the requirements of the SMP shall be complied with for the additional parking area. 3. If a change of use takes place, or an addition is proposed, which requires an increase in the parking area by an increment greater than 100 the requirements of the SMP shall be complied with for the entire parking area. F. Non conforming Landscape Areas 1. Adoption of the vegetation protection and landscaping regulations contained in this SMP shall not be construed to require a change in the landscape improvements for any legal landscape area which existed on the date of adoption of this SMP, unless and until the property is redeveloped or alteration of the existing structure beyond the thresholds provided herein. 2. At such time as the property is redeveloped or the existing structure is altered beyond the thresholds provided herein and the associated premises does not comply with the vegetation protection and landscaping requirements of this SMP, a landscape plan which conforms to the requirements of this SMP shall be submitted to the Director for approval. CL 144 12/08/2009 2:54:00 PM W \Shoreline \Council Review \\Document \Council SMP 12 -7 -09 City of T Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, UPDATING THE SHORELINE ELEMENT OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN TO INCORPORATE POLICIES THAT REFLECT NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR AREAS SUBJECT TO SHORELINE JURISDICTION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the goals and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County County -wide Planning Policies; and WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State, regulated pursuant to RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila; and WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995 Comprehensive Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the State Legislature has found that shorelines of the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and unrestricted construction on privately and publicly -owned shorelines of the State is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020, the Legislature directed local governments developing Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give preference to the following uses, in order of preference, which: 1) recognize and protect the State -wide interest over local interest; 2) preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3) result in long -term over short -term benefit; 4) protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public access to publicly -owned areas of the shorelines; 6) increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and 7) provide for any other element, as defined in RCW 90.58.100, deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), adopted new rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, to carry out provisions of the Shoreline Management Act; and WHEREAS, DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules provide direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines of the State; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their shoreline master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by DOE, in accordance with a schedule established in that section; and WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of Tukwila to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program is implemented by regulations codified at TMC Chapter 18.44, which are in turn guided by the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's Shoreline Goals and Policies; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's Shoreline Goals and Policies were adopted in Ordinance No. 1757, specifically, Goals and Policies 5.1 -5.10; and WHEREAS, in order to amend the Tukwila Shoreline Master Program, it is necessary to update the Comprehensive Plan Shoreline Goals and Policies, which have not been updated since 1995, to reflect the updated WAC 173 -26 regulations for shoreline master programs; and WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998, established a Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance, prepared background studies and used consultant services to prepare technical documents; and WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master Program in 2008; and W. \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:lsn 12/09/2009 Page 1 of 11 101 102 WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline Master Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," an "Inventory and Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a Determination of Non Significance was issued August 13, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9, 2008 to allow additional public input, revised the staff's draft Shoreline Master Program, and in February 2009 recommended the City Council adopt the Planning Commissions revised Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the hearing to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009 and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to review the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program to address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers and the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a variety of methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including mailings to property owners and tenants, notice boards along the Green River Trail, postings on the City's web site, creation of a broadcast email group who received updates of the shoreline review process and articles in the City's newsletter; and WHEREAS, one of the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan is to protect the natural environment, including shoreline areas, because they are an essential contributor to the overall welfare of the City's residents and businesses; and WHEREAS, the revisions to the Comprehensive Plan Policies for the shoreline address changes in shoreline character and the need to further protect the shoreline resources for public safety, flood control and habitat improvement; and WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Goals and Policies 5.1 -5.11 of the Shoreline Element of the City of Tukwila's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, are hereby amended to read as shown in "Attachment A" to this ordinance. Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force upon approval of the Shoreline Master Program by the Washington State Department of Ecology and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009. ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney W: \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Attachment: "Attachment A" City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Policies Page 2 of 11 5.1 Shoreline Environment Designations ATTACHMENT A Ordinance No. Goal: Shoreline Environment designations that meet Washington State Shoreline Management Act requirements, and reflect local conditions and Tukwila s long -term vision for its shoreline. The shoreline jurisdiction generally extends for 200 feet on either side of the Ordinary High Water mark, consistent with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act. In order to implement this goal, the SMP proposes three Environment Designations: Shoreline Residential, Urban Conservancy, and High Intensity (as detailed in the Shoreline Environment Section) that comply with the Washington State Shoreline Management Act and function well for the City. Policies: Policy 5.1.1 Shoreline Residential Environment. In the Shoreline Residential Environment, priority shall be given to the following: Uses that preserve or restore the natural character of the shoreline or promote preservation of vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands; and Development that is compatible with the natural and biological limitations of the land and water and that will not require extensive alteration of the shoreline or new "hard" structural shoreline stabilization. Where possible the removal of bulkheads, revetments, levees or other "hard" structural shoreline stabilization is required. Hard structural shoreline stabilization may be replaced with alternative bioengineered bank stabilization; and On publicly -owned property, water dependent or water related recreational activities that are compatible with the character of the shoreline residential areas. Maintenance of existing single family residential development patterns and public open space and recreation uses; Residential and recreational development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and maintenance of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions; Residential and recreational development that contributes to the restoration of ecological functions over time in areas where ecological degradation has occurred. Policy 5.1.2 Urban Conservancy Environment: In the Urban Conservancy Environment priority shall be given to the following: Development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions; Water enjoyment uses; Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline dependent use, and uses that prevent and /or minimize flood damage; Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands; Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control, consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on migration; Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated; W. \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 3 of it 103 104 Development that is compatible with the natural and biological limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for restoration projects. Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated; Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of commercial and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are minimized and where there is no net loss of shoreline functions. Policy 5.1.3 High Intensity Shoreline Environment: In the High Intensity Environment, priority shall be given to the following: Water dependent commercial and industrial uses; Development that promotes vegetation conservation and enhancement, sensitive areas protection, and preservation of water quality to assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. Uses that remove shoreline armoring, unless required for a shoreline dependent use, and uses that prevent and /or minimize flood damage; Uses that preserve or restore shoreline ecological functions provided by vegetation, open space, flood plain or sensitive area lands; Uses that minimize interference with navigation and flood control, consider impacts to public views, and allow for the safe, unobstructed passage of fish and wildlife, particularly those species dependent on migration; Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and when ecological impacts can be mitigated; Development that is compatible with the natural and biological limitations of the land and water that do not require extensive alteration of the shoreline or new shoreline stabilization, except for restoration projects. Uses that provide public access and public recreation whenever feasible and ecological impacts can be mitigated; Enhancement and restoration of ecological functions; and Redevelopment of underutilized areas and development of intensive commercial and industrial activities where shoreline impacts are minimized and where there is no net loss of shoreline functions. 5.2 Shoreline Planning and Management Goal: Expanded value of the river as a community and regional resource through regional coordination of shoreline management programs and through programs that foster river appreciation and awareness, involving partnerships among businesses, schools, government and community organizations. Policies: Policy 5.2.1 Coordinate shoreline planning and management activities with other local jurisdictions and their plans such as the WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan and the King County Flood Hazard Management Plan to establish region -wide consistency in addressing river issues with regional implications, such as economic development, public access, wildlife habitat, water quality control and flood control. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 4 of 11 Policy 5.2.2 Promote river stewardship and increase river awareness through actions which further shoreline goals, such as educational programs, community activities, and partnerships with Tukwila residents, businesses, schools, government, and community organizations. Policy 5.2.3 Promote and participate in the implementation of the Watershed Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan, including supporting the recommended projects located in Tukwila to improve the habitat functions of the Green /Duwamish River, as well as the Plan policies and goals. Implementation Strategies: WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan Tukwila SMP Restoration Plan King County Flood Hazard Management Plan 5.3 Land Development Use and Economic Vitality Goal: Development along the shoreline that fosters the economic vitality of Tukwila while preserving the long -term benefits of the river. Policies: Policy 5.3.1 Implement Shoreline Design Guidelines to: Encourage design that views the river as an amenity; Guide the design of multiple shoreline uses; Establish techniques for increasing multiple shoreline use; Prioritize locations for use; Encourage removal of invasive species with nonchemical methods and maintenance of native planted vegetation to minimize the presence of invasive species. Policy 5.3.2 Design and locate all shoreline development to minimize impacts on areas identified as important for other river uses, such as wildlife and aquatic habitat, river vegetation, public access and recreation, historical resource and flood control. Policy 5.3.3 When no other feasible alternative exists, allow structures to be placed in the water, or structural reinforcement of the riverbank, only when this provides a significant, long -term public benefit, does not interfere with navigation or flood management, does not cause a loss of shoreline function or is essential to a water dependent use. Policy 5.3.4 Prohibit the construction of new flood control facilities unless constructed to incorporate habitat restoration features and work to remove existing shoreline armoring where possible- to restore habitat functions. Policy 5.3.5 Recognize and promote the river's contribution to the economic vitality of Tukwila, as a valuable amenity for existing and future businesses which depend on or benefit from a shoreline location. Policy 5.3.6 Ensure that shoreline development does not diminish the commercial navigability of the River. Policy 5.3.7 Tukwila Urban Center Development Policy: Design and locate shoreline development in the Tukwila Urban Center to encourage water enjoyment uses that: Provide for shoreline multiple uses that are consistent with the underlying zoning; Provide additional benefits, such as riverbank restoration, fishing piers, non motorized boat launches, river views, or interpretive signs; W: \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Policies Comp P1an.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 5 of 11 105 106 Support public access to and along the shoreline; Provide water- enjoyment uses as transitions between the river and non -water dependent uses; Encourage efficient use of land, through such techniques as clustering, mixed use projects, cooperative parking or parking located under principal structures, and shared utility and access corridors. Ensure that new development and re- development in the Urban Center acknowledges the goal of a continuous street facade along Christensen Road and the riverfront and locates parking facilities to the interior of the lot. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.3.7: Shoreline Design Guidelines Development Standards Tukwila Urban Center Plan MIC Development Policy 5.3.8 Ensure that non -water dependent shoreline development in the MIC. provides for shoreline multiple uses to the extent that site security and the success of industrial operations are not jeopardized; ensures no net loss of shoreline function and provides adequate mitigation for the loss of shoreline multiple use opportunities. MIC Development Policy 5.3.10 Allow opportunities for commercial and recreational marinas to locate in Tukwila downstream of the turning basin, where compatible with existing and future navigability and existing and future ecological restoration projects. Policy 5.3.11 Development outside the Tukwila Urban Center or MIC. Design and locate shoreline development outside of the Tukwila Urban Center and the MIC to: Provide for multiple shoreline uses; Provide water- enjoyment uses as transitions between the dependent uses; Encourage efficient use of land through such techniques as projects, cooperative parking or parking located under principal utility and access corridors; Treat the river as an amenity in the design and location of the project. 5.4 Private Property Riehts Policies: WA Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 river and non -water clustering, mixed -use structures, and shared Goal: Protect rights of property owners to reasonable use and enjoyment of private property, through appropriate location, access to, and design of shoreline uses. Policy 5.4.1 Design, locate and manage shoreline uses in a manner which maintains reasonable use and enjoyment of private property. Policy 5.4.2 Design and locate public access in a way that is appropriate for the site, depending on site conditions and private property concerns. Policy 5.4.3 Special sensitivity is required for residential property; therefore, all single family residential development of four or fewer single family residential lots is excluded from requirements to provide private or public access. Single family property owners are not exempt from the responsibility to improve the habitat value of the shoreline environment. Page 6 of 11 Policy 5.4.4 Maintain flexibility in methods of obtaining public access, to allow for different site conditions and private property concerns that might conflict with public access, such as privacy, safety, and security. Policy 5.4.5 Obtain additional easement area to permit the improvement of flood control and river habitat by setting back levees or removing revetments and other hard shoreline armoring and replacing with more habitat friendly flood control levees or other shoreline treatment. 5.5 Shoreline Design Quality Goal: Enhanced identity of the river as a unique community asset through high quality development and public activities that reflect Tukwila's history and sense of community pride. Policies: Policy 5.5.1 Require that shoreline development outside of the MIC: Ensures no net loss of shoreline function, Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design Guidelines; Reflects principles of high quality design, in such areas as site planning, architecture and landscaping; Includes setbacks, bulk, height, density, landscape buffers and provisions for open space that enhance the shoreline environment. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.5.1: Shoreline design guidelines Shoreline development standards Tukwila Urban Center Plan Policy 5.5.2 Require that shoreline development in the MIC: Is designed to be consistent with Tukwila Shoreline Design Guidelines; Maintains or enhances the existing visual quality along the river; Provides trees and other landscaping to buffer industrial uses that are incompatible with other river uses; Provides amenities that enhance enjoyment of the river by employees. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.5.2: Shoreline design guidelines Shoreline development standards 5.6 Access and Recreational Use Goal: Increase the amount and diversity of opportunities for public recreation and access to and along the river, including visual and cultural access, access to the water's edge, opportunities for small boat navigation and access, and connections to other neighborhoods, consistent with the shoreline character. Policies: Policy 5.6.1 Retain and improve areas identified as important in the network of public access to the river, including cross -town connections, former railroad right -of -ways and unimproved street -end right -of -ways, historic sites, unique natural features or other areas valuable for their interpretive potential. W. \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 7 of 11 107 108 Policy 5.6.2 Maintain existing parks along the shoreline and acquire additional park land to increase access and recreation opportunities. Policy 5.6.3 Incorporate river access requirements to guide the design, location and management of shoreline public access in short plats over 4 lots and all subdivisions as well as multi- family, commercial and industrial development; to identify types of access appropriate and feasible for various site conditions and locations; and to establish strategies, funding sources and priorities for acquisition and enhancement of shoreline public access. Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.1 5.6.3: Shoreline design guidelines Shoreline access guidelines Shoreline development standards Walk and Ro11 Plan Parks and Open Space Plan Policy 5.6.4 Design, locate and manage public access for diverse types and variable levels of intensity in order to minimize impacts on vulnerable features of the natural environment and to minimize conflicts with private property uses. Policy 5.6.5 Where shoreline development provides public access areas, reserve such areas for use by the public through the means most appropriate for the type, scale and impacts of the development, such as dedication, donation or sale of an easement or right -of -way to the City. Policy 5.6.6 Support the implementation of the King County Green River Trail, per the existing King County Green River Trail Master Plan as well as pedestrian /bicycle connections with the Trail from properties on the opposite bank and the expansion of this trail where appropriate. Policies for Development outside MIC: Policy 5.6.7 Require subdivisions, multi- family residential uses and commercial and industrial uses along the shoreline to provide a trail for public access along the river in areas identified for trail connections, consistent with the King County Green River Trail Master Plan, Shoreline Master Program or any other approved access plan. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.7: King County Green River Trail Master Plan Shoreline public access standards Walk and Roll Plan Parks and Open Space Plan Policy 5.6.8 Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access, and appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines. Implementation Strategies for Policy 5.6.8: King County Green River Trail Master Plan Shoreline public access standards Walk and Roll Plan Parks and Open Space Plan Policy 5.6.9 Except for single family residential development of four or fewer single family residential lots, shoreline development shall maintain and encourage views of the water from the shoreline and from upland area, through design of building height, bulk and modulation, and windows, breezeways and outdoor spaces. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 8 of 11 Implementation Strategies: Shoreline design guidelines Policy 5.6.10 Public access improvements should be designed and constructed to: Look and "feel" welcoming to the public; Connect to public areas, street ends, and other pedestrian or public throughfares; Enhance the character of Tukwila; Avoid conflicts with water- dependent uses; Provide for public safety and minimize impacts to private property and individual privacy and security; Require a low level of operation and maintenance; Ensure that construction (i.e. structures and access pathways) incorporates environmentally sensitive design and materials (e.g., non toxic, natural materials) Policy 5.6.11 Improve pedestrian connections between the river, Green River Trail and the Urban Center's commercial, office and residential uses. Policies for Development in MIC: Policy 5.6.12 For MIC properties included in the King County Green River Trail Master Plan or other approved access plan, require shoreline development to provide a trail for public access along the river. Policy 5.6.13 Where shoreline public access is provided, ensure that it is designed to be safe and convenient and includes access amenities such as benches, drinking fountains, public parking areas, handicapped access and appropriate lighting, consistent with the shoreline access guidelines. Policy 5.6.14 For MIC properties not included in the King County Green River Trail Plan, require shoreline development to provide public access or a private natural area in lieu of public access, or otherwise mitigate the loss of public access. Implementation Strategies for Policies 5.6.12 -14: Shoreline design guidelines Shoreline access guidelines Walk and Roll Plan Parks and Open Space 5.7 Transvortation within the Shoreline Turisdiction Goal Safe corridors and amenities for pedestrians, cyclists and users of public transportation, allowing more citizens to access and enjoy the river. Policies: Policy 5.7.1 Design and locate transportation uses within the shoreline jurisdiction to be compatible with shoreline vegetation or other habitat features, turn -outs or parking areas for public access, bio- filtration swales to protect water quality, public art or interpretive signs. Policy 5.7.2 Ensure the transportation uses within the shoreline jurisdiction and within those corridors identified as river cross connections provide safe, convenient and attractive pedestrian, bicycle and boater access and facilities for public transportation. w \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:tsn 12/09/2009 Page 9 of 11 109 110 Policy 5.7.3 Minimize transportation impacts to the natural environment (such as air, noise, odor or water pollution) and enhance the natural environment wherever possible through planting trees and other habitat features. Policy 5.7 4 Encourage maintenance of the river's navigability up to the Turning Basin, where this achieves a greater public interest and a balance between costs and benefits to the broader community and impacts to the habitat functions of the river, in recognition of the historical significance of navigation and its importance to the economic vitality of water dependent uses and the MIC 5.8 Historical Resource Use and Archaeoloeical Protection Goal: Recognition of the river's contribution to Tukwila history and community identity through identification, enhancement, restoration, and protection of sites with historic and cultural value and through development of interpretive and educational programs. Policies: Policy 5.8.1 Ensure that shoreline development reflects the river's important role in Tukwila's history and that long -term public use of the river as an historical resource is protected by providing for the identification, protection and interpretation of unique historic and archaeological features. Policy 5.8.2 Ensure that public shoreline development reflects the river's natural features and community traditions. Policy 5.8.3 Ensure that archaeological artifacts and sites are protected when development takes place in the shoreline jurisdiction. 5.9 Natural Environment and Habitat Use Goal: Restored, enhanced, and protected natural environment resources along the river, including trees, wildlife habitat and features with value for long -term public, scientific and educational uses. Policies: Policy 5.9.1 Ensure that shoreline development results in no net loss of shoreline ecological function, minimizes impacts on wildlife and that significant vegetation, sandbars, wetlands, watercourses, and other critical areas identified as important for habitat are maintained through the proper location, design, construction, and management of all shoreline uses and activities. Policy 5.9.2 Ensure that shoreline development and activities protect riverbank vegetation and, where feasible, restore degraded riverbanks in accordance with the vegetation management provisions of the Shoreline Master Program, in order to minimize and compensate for impacts to fish and wildlife habitat. Policy 5.9.3 Mitigate unavoidable disturbances of significant vegetation or habitat through replacement of habitat and provision of interpretive features consistent with the shoreline access guidelines. Policy 5.9.4 Support relief from certain shoreline master program requirements for properties affected by habitat restoration projects that result in the movement of the ordinary high water mark. Policy 5.9.5 Support establishing the Transition Zone as the priority area for habitat restoration projects given its importance for subtidal and intertidal habitats to allow salmonids to gradually adjust to the change between fresh and saltwater conditions. w \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CLksn 12/09/2009 Page lO of 11 5.10 Water Oualitv. Surface Water and Flood Control Use Goal: Improved water quality and quantity control programs affecting the Green /Duwamish River that improve the river's water quality, provide habitat for fish and wildlife, protect public health and safety, and enhance public enjoyment of the river. Policies: Policy 5.10.1 Design, locate, and manage shoreline development including streets, flood control projects, surface water drainage and sewer systems, clearing and grading activities, and landscaping in a manner which minimizes opportunities for pollutants to enter the river, provides erosion control and otherwise protects water quality. Policy 5.10.2 Design, manage, and mitigate flood control uses to minimize impacts to other shoreline uses such as trees and riverbank vegetation, public access and recreation, and fish habitat; and set them back from the river, where feasible for the project, with land areas between the water and the levee set aside as open space for public recreation or wildlife habitat. Policy 5.10.3 Consistent with project feasibility, mitigate unavoidable negative impacts on other shoreline uses owing to flood control uses through such measures as restoration of trees and native riverbank vegetation, provision of public access to the water's edge, interpretive features, or other mitigation of loss of opportunities for shoreline multiple uses. Policy 5.10.4 Obtain additional easements, where needed, from property owners to set back levees to improve flood control and shoreline habitat functions. Where possible, as redevelopment occurs, replace bulkheads, revetments or other hard bank stabilization with more natural levees, riverbanks or other shoreline treatments, to improve flood control, ecological functions and habitat. Implementation Strategies: Increase levee setback to incorporate vegetated mid -slope benches Shoreline access guidelines Surface Water Management Plan WRIA 9 Plan water quality policies Shoreline Restoration Plan 5.11 Public Health. Safety and Welfare. Comprehensive Plan Goal 5.11 Goal: Shoreline uses that do not endanger public health, safety and welfare, or the capacity of the river to provide long -term benefits and resources to the community Policies: Policy 5.11.1 Design, locate, and manage shoreline uses, such as capital improvement projects and private development, in a manner that does not endanger public health, safety and welfare, and enhances the capacity of the river to provide long -term flood protection, habitat and other benefits and resources to the community and the environment. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Policies Comp Plan.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 11 of 11 111 112 W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, UPDATING REQUIREMENTS FOR SHORELINE REGULATIONS TO INCORPORATE NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS; REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 1796 §3 (PART), 1775 §2, AND 1758 §1 (PART), AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.44, "SHORELINE OVERLAY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the goals and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County County -wide Planning Policies; and WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State, regulated under RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila; and WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995 Comprehensive Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the State Legislature has found that shorelines of the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and unrestricted construction on privately -owned and publicly -owned shorelines of the State is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020, the Legislature directed local governments developing Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give preference to uses in order of preference, which: 1) recognize and protect State -wide interests over local interests; 2) preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3) result in long -term over short -term benefit; 4) protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shoreline; 6) increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and 7) provide for any other element, as defined in RCW 90.58.100, deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Bull Trout have been listed as "threatened" under the Federal Endangered Species Act, and the Green /Duwamish River throughout Tukwila is a critical resource for these species, making shoreline habitat protection and restoration crucial, particularly in the Transition Zone portion of the river that extends from the East Marginal Way South bridge through the north City limits; and WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), adopted new rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, to carry out provisions of the Shoreline Management Act; and WHEREAS, DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules provide direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines of the State; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their shoreline master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by DOE, in accordance with a schedule established in that section; and WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of Tukwila to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998, established a Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance, prepared background studies and used consultant services to prepare technical documents; and WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master Program in 2008; and Page l of 47 113 114 WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline Master Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," art "Inventory and Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a Determination of Non Significance was issued August 13, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9, 2008 to allow additional public input, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to the City Council in February 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the hearing to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009 and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to review the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program to address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers and the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a variety of methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including: mailings to property owners and tenants; notice boards along the Green River Trail; postings on the City's web site; creation of a broadcast email group who received updates of the shoreline review process; and articles in the City's newsletter; and WHEREAS, revisions to the City's shoreline regulations, codified in Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.44, are required to implement the updated Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, new and revised Zoning Code definitions, codifed in Chapter 18.06 of the Tukwila Municipal Code, are required to implement the changes to TMC Chapter 18.4 TMC and the updated Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Purpose and Definition Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: 18.44.010 Purpose and Definition The purpose of this chapter is to implement the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) of 1971, as amended (referred to in the chapter as "Shoreline Act" (SMA)) and the rules and regulations hereunder (referred to in this chapter as "shoreline regulations as codified in the Washington Administrative Code; and to provide for the regulation of development that affects those areas of the City under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Act. Section 2. Shoreline Environment Designations Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: 18.44.020 Shoreline Environment Designations All shoreline within the City is designated "urban" and further identified as follows: 1. Shoreline Residential Environment. All lands zoned for residential use as measured 200 feet landward from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM); 2. Urban Conservancy Environment. All lands not zoned for residential use upstream from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM; and 3. High Intensity Environment. All lands downstream from the Turning Basin as measured 200 feet landward from the OHWM. Section 3. Principally Permitted Uses Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: 18.44.030 Principally Permitted Uses A. This section specifies the uses that are permitted outright, permitted as a Conditional Use or prohibited altogether for each Shoreline Environment. Also included are special conditions and general requirements controlling specific uses. These regulations are intended to implement the purpose of each Shoreline Environment designation. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 2 of 47 B. General Use Regulations. All shoreline uses shall meet the requirements listed below. 1. The first priority for City-owned property within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall be reserved for water dependent uses including, but not limited to, habitat restoration, followed by water enjoyment uses, public access, passive recreation, passive open space uses, or public educational purposes. 2. No hazardous waste handling, processing or storage is allowed within the SMA shoreline jurisdiction, unless incidental to a use allowed in the designated shoreline environment and adequate controls are in place to prevent any releases to the shoreline /river. 3. Overwater structures shall not cause a net loss of ecological function, interfere with navigation or flood management, or present potential hazards to downstream properties or facilities. They shall comply with the standards in the Overwater Structures Section of TMC Section 18.44.070(K). 4. Parking as a primary use is not permitted, except for existing Park- and -Ride lots, where adequate stormwater collection and treatment is in place to protect water quality Parking is permitted only as an accessory to a permitted or conditional use in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. 5. All development, activities or uses unless an approved over water, flood management structure, or shoreline restoration project shall be prohibited waterward of the OHWM. Section 4. Shoreline Residential Environment Uses Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.040 Shoreline Residential Environment Uses A. Shoreline Residential Buffer Delineated Uses. The Shoreline Residential River Buffer shall consist of the area needed to achieve a 2.5:1 slope of the river bank, measured from the toe of the bank to the top of the bank, plus 20 linear feet measured from the top of the bank landward; provided, that in no case shall the Shoreline Residential Buffer be less than 50 feet landward of the OHWM. 1. Permitted Uses. No uses or structures are permitted in the Shoreline Residential Buffer except for the following: a. Shoreline restoration projects; b. Over -water structures subject to the standards in the Over -water Structures Section associated with water- dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control or channel management. Private, single residence piers for the sole use of the property owner shall not be considered an outright use on the shoreline. A dock may be allowed when the applicant has demonstrated a need for moorage and that the following alternatives have been investigated and are not available or feasible: 1) commercial or marina moorage; 2) floating moorage buoys; 3) joint use moorage pier /dock. c. Public parks, recreation and open space; d. Public pedestrian bridges; e. Public and /or private promenades, footpaths or trails; f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height or 25 square feet in area or block views to the shoreline from adjacent properties; g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code; h. Construction, maintenance or re- development of levees for flood control purposes, provided that any new or redeveloped levee shall meet the applicable levee requirements of this chapter; i. Vehicle bridges, only if connecting public rights -of -way; j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of refuse; k. Fire lanes when co-located with levee maintenance roads; W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 3 of 47 115 116 1. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in TMC Section 18.44.070(F). m. Water dependent uses and their structures, as long as there is no net loss of shoreline ecological function; n. Fences, provided the maximum height of a fence along the shoreline is four feet and the fence does not extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain -link fences must be vinyl coated. o. Existing essential streets, roads and rights -of -way may be maintained or improved; p. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use; q. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground; r. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments; and s. Patios or decks not exceeding 18 inches in height, limited to a maximum 200 square feet and 50% of the width of the river frontage. Decks or patios must be located landward of the top of the bank and be constructed to be pervious and of environmentally friendly materials. t. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible. 2. Conditional Uses. Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the shoreline residential river buffer subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64 and shall be reviewed through a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit: a. Dredging activities when in compliance with all federal and state regulations, when necessary for navigation or remediation of contaminated sediments. b. Dredging for navigational purposes is permitted where necessary for assuring safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant ecological impacts are minimized and when mitigation is provided. Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins is restricted to maintaining previously dredged and /or existing authorized location, depth and width. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fill material is prohibited. c. New private vehicle bridges. B. Shoreline Residential Environment Outside of Buffer Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted within the Shoreline Residential Environment outside of the Shoreline Residential River Buffer. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of the Shoreline Residential Development Zone as established in the Shoreline Environment Designation section. 1. Permitted Uses. The Shoreline Residential Environment shall contain residential, recreational and limited commercial uses and accessory uses as allowed in the underlying zoning district. In addition, the Shoreline Residential Environment shall allow the following uses: a. All uses permitted in the Shoreline Residential River Buffer; b. For non residential uses, parking /loading and storage facilities located to the most upland portion of the property and adequately screened and /or landscaped in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping section; c. Railroad tracks; and d. Public or private roads. 2. Conditional Uses. All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone may be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is required. Section 5. Urban Conservancy Environment Uses Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.050 Urban Conservancy Environment Uses W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 4 of 47 A. Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer Delineated. The Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer shall consist of that area measured 100 feet landward of the OHWM for non leveed portions of the river, and that area measured 125 feet landward from the OHWM for leveed portions of the river B. Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer Uses. 1. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the Urban Conservancy River Buffer: a. Shoreline restoration projects; b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over -water Structures Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(K), that are associated with water dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or ecological restoration; c. Public parks, recreation and open space; d. Public and /or private promenades, footpaths or trails; e. Public pedestrian bridges; f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and 25 square feet in area and views of the shoreline are not blocked from adjacent properties; g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code; h. Construction, maintenance or re- development of levees for flood control purposes, provided that any new or re- developed levee shall meet the applicable levee requirements of this chapter; i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of -way; existing public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or replaced. j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of refuse; k. Levee maintenance roads; 1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for landscaping purposes; m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(F); n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights -of -way may be maintained or improved; o. Water dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the underlying zoning district; p. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible; q. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use; r Essential public facilities, both above and below ground; s. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments. t. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter systems and outfalls. Any regional detention facility located in the buffer shall be designed such that a fence is not required, planted with native vegetation, designed to blend with the surrounding environment, and provide design features that serve both public and private use, such as an access road that can also serve as a trail. The facility shall be designed to locate access roads and other impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical. 2. Conditional Uses. Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the Shoreline Urban Conservancy Environment buffer, subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64 and shall be reviewed through a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit: W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 5 of 47 117 118 a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant ecological impacts are minimized and when mitigation is provided. b. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation is provided. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fill material is prohibited. Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations. c. New private vehicle bridges. C. Urban Conservancy Environment Outside of Buffer Uses. The following uses are permitted in the Urban Conservancy Environment, outside of the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of the Urban Conservancy Environment as established in the Shoreline Environment Designation section. 1. Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer and /or the underlying zoning district may be allowed. 2. Conditional Uses. All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone may be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be required. D. Urban Conservancy Buffer Width Reduction The Director may reduce the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer as follows: 1. For property located within the 100 -foot buffer in non -levee portions of the river, the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer may be reduced to that area occupied by the river bank plus 20 feet measured landward from the top of the bank; provided however, that the applicant must first re -slope the river bank to 2.5:1, provide a 20 -foot setback from the top of the new slope and vegetate both the river bank and the 20 -foot setback area in accordance with the standards in TMC 18.44.080, and provided that the Director determines that any buffer reduction will not result in direct, indirect or long -term adverse impacts to shoreline ecosystem functions. Further, a buffer enhancement plan, including removal of invasive plants and plantings using a variety of native vegetation that improves the functional attributes of the buffer and provides additional protection for the watercourse functions, must be approved by the Director and implemented by the applicant as a condition of the reduction. 2. For property located within the 125 -foot buffer along leveed portions of the river, the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer may be reduced to that area occupied by levee or river bank improvements meeting the minimum levee profile or other levee standards provided in this chapter, plus 10 feet measured landward from the landward toe of the levee or (if permitted by this chapter) floodwall. In the event that the owner provides the City with a 10 -foot levee maintenance easement, measured landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall and prohibiting the construction of any structures and allows the City to access the area to inspect the levee, then the buffer shall be reduced to the landward toe of the levee, or landward edge of the levee floodwall, as the case may be. 3. If fill is placed along the back slope of a new levee, the Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer may be reduced to the point where the ground plane intersects the back slope of the levee; provided, that the property owner must grant the City a levee maintenance easement measured 10 feet landward from the landward toe of the levee or levee wall, and which easement prohibits the construction of any structures and allows the City to access the area to inspect the levee and /or wall and make any necessary repairs. Section 6. High Intensity Environment Uses Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.060 High Intensity Environment Uses A. High Intensity Environment Buffer Delineated The High Intensity Environment Buffer shall consist of an area measured 100 feet landward from the OHWM. The remaining area of shoreline jurisdiction is non buffer area. B. High Intensity Environment Buffer Uses. 1. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the High Intensity River Buffer: a. Shoreline restoration projects; W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 6 of 47 b. Over -water structures subject to the standards established in the Over -water Structures Section that are associated with water dependent uses, public access, recreation, flood control, channel management or ecological restoration; c. Public parks, recreation and open space; d. Public and /or private promenades, footpaths or trails; e. Public pedestrian bridges; f. Recreation structures such as benches, tables, viewpoints, and picnic shelters, provided no such structure shall exceed 15 feet in height and 25 square feet in area and no views of the shoreline are blocked from adjacent properties; g. Signs conforming to the Sign Code; h. Construction, maintenance or re- development of levees for flood control purposes, provided that any new or re- developed levee shall meet the applicable levee requirements of this chapter; i. New vehicle bridges: permitted only if connecting public rights -of -way; existing public or private vehicle bridges may be maintained or replaced; j. Utility towers and utilities except the provision, distribution, collection, transmission or disposal of refuse; k. Levee maintenance roads; 1. Plaza connectors between buildings and levees, not exceeding the height of the levee, are permitted for the purpose of providing and enhancing pedestrian access along the river and for landscaping purposes; m. New shoreline stabilization utilizing the development standards in the Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(F); n. Existing essential streets, roads and rights -of -way may be maintained or improved; o. Water dependent commercial and industrial development, if permitted by the underlying zoning district; p. Support facilities for above or below ground utilities or pollution control, such as runoff ponds, filter systems, detention ponds and outfall facilities, provided they are located at or below grade and as far from the OHWM as technically feasible; q. Outdoor storage, only in conjunction with a water dependent use; r. Essential public facilities, both above and below ground, and s. Landfill as part of an approved remediation plan for the purpose of capping contaminated sediments. t. Regional detention facilities that meet the City's Infrastructure Design and Construction Standards along with their supporting elements such as ponds, piping, filter systems and outfalls. Any regional detention facility located in the buffer shall be designed such that a fence is not required, planted with native vegetation, designed to blend with the surrounding environment, and provide design features that serve both public and private use, such as an access road that can also serve as a trail. The facility shall be designed to locate access roads and other impervious surfaces as far from the river as practical. 2. Conditional Uses. Only the following may be allowed as a Conditional Use in the Shoreline High Intensity Environment Buffer subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be required. a. Dredging activities where necessary for assuring safe and efficient accommodation of existing navigational uses and then only when significant ecological impacts are minimized and when mitigation is provided. b. Dredging for remediation of contaminated sediments when mitigation is provided. Dredging of bottom materials for the purpose of obtaining fill material is prohibited. Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations. c. New private vehicle bridges. C. Shoreline Urban High Intensity Environment Uses. The Shoreline High Intensity Environment shall consist of the remaining area within the 200 foot Shoreline Jurisdiction that W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 7 of 47 119 120 is not within the Shoreline High Intensity Environment Buffer area. Uses shall meet the purposes and criteria of the Shoreline Environment Designations section. 1. Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the High Intensity Environment Buffer and /or the underlying zoning district may be allowed. 2. Conditional Uses. All uses listed as Conditional Uses in the underlying zone may be allowed subject to the requirements, procedures and conditions established by TMC Chapter 18.64. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit shall be required. D. Shoreline High Intensity Environment Buffer Reduction. The Director may reduce the High Intensity Environment Buffer where the applicant re- slopes the river bank to be no steeper than 3:1 above the OHWM, provides a 20 -foot setback from the top of the new slope, vegetates both the river bank and the 20 -foot setback area in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, and the Director determines that there will be no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. On properties where the bank slope currently is no steeper than 3:1 or where the property owner has already re- sloped the river bank, provided a 20 -foot setback and vegetated the bank and setback as provided in this chapter, the buffer width will be the distance measured from the OHWM to the top of the bank, plus 20 feet. Section 7. Development Standards Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.070 Development Standards A. Applicability. The development standards of this chapter apply to work that meets the definition of substantial development except for vegetation removal per TMC Section 18.44.080, which applies to all shoreline development. The term "substantial development" applies to non conforming, new or re- development. Non conforming uses, structures, parking lots and landscape areas will be governed by the standards in TMC Section 18.44.130E, "Non- conforming Development." B. Shoreline Residential Development Standards. A shoreline substantial development permit is not required for construction within the Shoreline Residential Environment by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his /her own use or for the use of a family member. Such construction and all normal appurtenant structures must otherwise conform to this Chapter. Short subdivisions and subdivisions are not exempt from obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 1. Shoreline Residential Environment Standards. The following standards apply to the Shoreline Residential Environment: a. The development standards of the applicable underlying zoning district (Title 18, Tukwila Municipal Code) shall apply. b. New development and uses must be sited so as to allow natural bank inclination of 2.5:1 slope with a 20 -foot setback from the top of the bank. The Director may require a riverbank analysis as part of any development proposal. c. Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc., shall be suitably screened with native vegetation per the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. d. New shoreline stabilization, repair of existing stabilization or modifications to the river bank must comply with the standards in the Shoreline Stabilization Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(F). e. Short plats of five to nine lots or formal subdivisions must be designed to provide public access to the river in accordance with the Public Access Section, TMC Section 18.44.100. Signage is required to identify the public access point(s). f. Parking facilities associated with single family residential development or public recreational facilities are subject to the specific performance standards set forth in the Off Street Parking Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(I). g. Fences, freestanding walls or other structures normally accessory to residences must not block views of the river from adjacent residences or extend waterward beyond the top of the bank. Chain link fencing must be vinyl coated. h. Recreational structures permitted in the buffer must provide buffer mitigation. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 8 of 47 i. The outside edge of surface transportation facilities, such as railroad tracks, streets, or public transit shall be located no closer than 50 feet from the OHWM, except where the surface transportation facility is bridging the river. j. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water dependent uses and their structures, the maximum height for structures shall be as established by the underlying zone. 2. Design Review. Design review is required for non residential development in the Shoreline Residential Environment. C. High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment Development Standards. 1. Standards. The following standards apply in the High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment. a. The development standards for the applicable underlying zoning district (Title 18, Tukwila Municipal Code) shall apply. b. All new development performed by public agencies, or new multi- family, commercial, or industrial development shall provide public access in accordance with the standards in the Public Access Section. c. Development or re- development of properties in areas of the shoreline armored with revetments or other hard armoring other than levees, or with non armored river banks, must comply with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, TMC Section 18.44.080. d. Any new shoreline stabilization or repairs to existing stabilization must comply with Shoreline Stabilisation Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(F). e. Over -water structures shall be allowed only for water dependent uses and the size limited to the minimum necessary to support the structure's intended use and shall result in no net loss to shoreline ecological function. Over -water structures must comply with the standards in the Over -water Structures Section, TMC Section 18.44.070(K). 2. Setbacks and Site Configuration. a. The yard setback adjacent to the river is the buffer width established for the applicable shoreline environment. b. A fishing pier, viewing platform or other outdoor feature that provides access to the shoreline is not required to meet a setback from the OHWM. 3. Height Restrictions. Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water dependent uses and their structures, to preserve visual access to the shoreline and avoid massing of tall buildings within the shoreline jurisdiction, the maximum height for structures shall be as follows: a. 15 feet where located within the River Buffer; b. 45 feet between the outside landward edge of the River Buffer and 200 feet of the OHWM. Provided, no permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or structure of more than 35 feet above average grade level on shorelines of the State that will obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines. The Director may approve a 15% increase in height if the project proponent provides additional restoration and /or enhancement of the shoreline buffer, beyond what may otherwise be required in accordance with the standards of TMC Section 18.44.080, Vegetation Protection and Landscaping. If the required buffer has already been restored, the project proponent may provide a 20% wider buffer, and /or enhanced in order to obtain the 15% increase in height in accordance with TMC Section 18.44.080, Vegetation Protection and Landscaping 4. Lighting. In addition to the lighting standards in TMC Chapter 18.60, "Board of Architectural Review," lighting for the site or development shall be designed and located so that: a. The minimum light levels in parking areas and paths between the building and street shall be one -foot candle; b. Lighting shall be designed to prevent light spillover and glare on adjacent properties and on the river channel, be directed downward so as to illuminate only the immediate area, and be shielded to eliminate direct off -site illumination; c. The general grounds need not be lighted; W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 9 of 47 121 122 d. The lighting is incorporated into a unified landscape and /or site plan. D Surface Water and Water Quality. The following standards apply to all shoreline development. 1. New surface water systems may not discharge directly into the river or streams tributary to the river without pre treatment to reduce pollutants and meet State water quality standards. 2. Such pre treatment may consist of biofiltration, oil/ water separators, or other methods approved by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. 3. Shoreline development, uses and activities shall not cause any increase in surface runoff, and shall have adequate provisions for stormwater detention infiltration. 4. Stormwater outfalls must be designed so as to cause no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or adverse impacts where functions are impaired. New stormwater outfalls or maintenance of existing outfalls must include shoreline restoration as part of the project. sewer. 5. Shoreline development and activities shall have adequate provisions for sanitary 6. Solid and liquid wastes and untreated effluents shall not be allowed to enter any bodies of water or to be discharged onto shorelands. 7. The use of low impact development techniques is required, unless such techniques conflict with other provisions of this chapter or are shown to not be feasible due to site conditions. E. Flood Hazard Reduction. The following standards apply to all shoreline development. 1. New flood hazard structures must incorporate appropriate vegetation restoration and conservation actions consistent with the standards of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. 2. New structural flood hazard reduction structures shall be allowed only when it can be demonstrated by a riverbank analysis that: a. They are necessary to protect existing development; b. Non structural measures are not feasible; and c. Impacts to ecological functions and priority species and habitats can be successfully mitigated so as to assure no net loss. 3. Levees, berms and similar flood control structures, whether new or redeveloped, shall be designed to meet the minimum levee profile, except as provided in Section 18.44.070(E)10 below. 4. Publicly- funded structural measures to reduce flood hazards shall improve public access or dedicate and provide public access unless public access improvements would cause unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public, inherent and unavoidable security problems, or significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated. 5. Rehabilitation or replacement of existing flood control structures such as levees, with a primary purpose of containing the 1% annual chance flood event, shall be allowed where it can be demonstrated by an engineering analysis that the existing structure: a. Does not provide an appropriate level of protection for surrounding lands; or b. Does not meet the minimum levee profile or other appropriate engineering design standards for stability (e.g., over steepened side slopes for existing soil and /or flow conditions); and c. Repair of the existing structure will not cause or increase significant adverse ecological impacts to the shoreline. 6. Rehabilitated or replaced flood hazard reduction structures shall not extend the toe of slope any further waterward of the OHWM than the existing structure. 7. New structural flood hazard reduction measures, such as levees, berms and similar flood control structures shall be placed landward of the floodway as determined by the best available information. W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 10 of 47 8. New, redeveloped or replaced structural flood hazard reduction measures shall be placed landward of associated wetlands, and designated fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. 9. No commercial, industrial, office or residential development shall be located within a floodplain without a Flood Control Zone Permit issued by the City. No development shall be located within a floodway, except as otherwise permitted. 10. New, redeveloped or replaced flood hazard reduction structures may deviate from the minimum levee profile only as follows. A floodwall may be substituted for all or a portion of a levee back slope only where necessary to avoid encroachment or damage to a structure legally constructed prior to the date of adoption of this subsection, and which structure has not lost its nonconforming status. The floodwall shall be designed to be the minimum necessary to provide 10 feet of clearance between the levee and the building, or the minimum necessary to preserve access needed for building functionality while meeting all engineering safety standards. A floodwall may also be used where necessary to prevent the levee from encroaching upon a railroad easement recorded prior to the date of adoption of this subsection. If a floodwall is permitted under this subsection the levee slope must be 2.5H:1V unless it is not physically possible to achieve such a slope; in that instance, the levee slope must be as close to 2.5H:1V as physically possible. F. Shoreline Stabilization. The provisions of this section apply to those structures or actions intended to minimize or prevent erosion of adjacent uplands and /or failure of riverbanks resulting from waves, tidal fluctuations or river currents. Shoreline stabilization or armoring involves the placement of erosion resistant materials (e.g., large rocks and boulders, cement, pilings and /or LWD (LWD)) or the use of bioengineering techniques to reduce or eliminate erosion of shorelines and risk to human infrastructure. This form of shoreline stabilization is distinct from flood control structures and flood hazard reduction measures (such as levees). The terms "shoreline stabilization," "shoreline protection" and "shoreline armoring" are used interchangeably. 1. Shoreline protection shall not be considered an outright permitted use and shall be permitted only when it has been demonstrated through a riverbank analysis and report that shoreline protection is necessary for the protection of existing legally established structures and public improvements. 2. New development and re- development shall be designed and configured on the lot to avoid the need for new shoreline stabilization. Removal of failing shoreline stabilization shall be incorporated into re- development design proposals wherever feasible. 3. Replacement of lawfully established, existing bulkheads or revetments are subject to the following priority system: a. The first priority for replacement of bulkheads or revetments shall be landward of the existing bulkhead. b. The second priority for replacement of existing bulkheads or revetments shall be to replace in place (at the bulkhead's existing location). 4. When evaluating a proposal against the above priority system, at a minimum the following criteria shall be considered: a. Existing topography; b. Existing development; c. Location of abutting bulkheads; d. Impact to shoreline ecological functions; and e. Impact to river hydraulics, potential changes in geomorphology, and to other areas of the shoreline. 5. Proponents of new or replacement hard shoreline stabilization (e.g. bulkheads or revetments) must demonstrate through a documented riverbank analysis that bioengineered shoreline protection measures or bioengineering erosion control designs will not provide adequate upland protection of existing structures or would pose a threat or risk to adjacent property. The study must also demonstrate that the proposed hard shoreline stabilization will not adversely affect other infrastructure or adjacent shorelines. 6. Where allowed, shoreline armoring shall be designed, constructed and maintained in a manner that does not result in a net loss of ecological function, including fish habitat, and shall conform to the requirements of the 2004 Washington State Department of Fish and W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 11 of 47 123 124 Wildlife (or as amended) criteria and guidelines for integrated stream bank protection (Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other regulatory requirements. The hard shoreline stabilization must be designed and approved by an engineer licensed in the State of Washington and qualified to design shoreline stabilization structures. 7. Shoreline armoring shall be designed to the minimum size, height, bulk and extent necessary to remedy the identified hazard. 8. An applicant must demonstrate the following in order to qualify for the RCW Section 90.58.030.30(e)(iii)(ii) exemption from the requirement to obtain a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for a proposed single family bulkhead and to insure that the bulkhead will be consistent with the SMP: a. Erosion from currents or waves is imminently threatening a legally established single family detached dwelling unit or one or more appurtenant structures; and b. The proposed bulkhead is more consistent with the City's Master Program in protecting the site and adjoining shorelines and non structural alternatives such as slope drainage systems, bioengineering or vegetative growth stabilization are not feasible or will not adequately protect a legally established residence or appurtenant structure; and c. The proposed bulkhead is located landward of the OHWM or it connects to adjacent, legally established bulkheads; and d. The maximum height of the proposed bulkhead is no more than one foot above the elevation of extreme high water on tidal waters as determined by the National Ocean Survey published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 9. Bulkheads or revetments shall be constructed of suitable materials that will serve to accomplish the desired end with maximum preservation of natural characteristics. Materials with the potential for water quality degradation shall not be used. Design and construction methods shall consider aesthetics and habitat protection. Automobile bodies, tires or other junk or waste material that may release undesirable chemicals or other material shall not be used for shoreline protection. 10. The builder of any bulkhead or revetment shall be financially responsible for determining the nature and the extent of probable adverse effects on fish and wildlife or on the property of others caused by his /her construction and shall propose and implement solutions approved by the City to minimize such effects. 11. When shoreline stabilization is required at a public access site, provision for safe access to the water shall be incorporated in the design whenever possible. 12. Placement of bank protection material shall occur from the top of the bank and shall be supervised by the property owner or contractor to ensure material is not dumped directly onto the bank face. 13. Bank protection material shall be clean and shall be of a sufficient size to prevent its being washed away by high water flows. 14. When riprap is washed out and presents a hazard to the safety of recreational users of the river, it shall be removed by the owner of such material. 15. Bank protection associated with bridge construction and maintenance may be permitted subject to the provisions of this chapter and shall conform to provisions of the State Hydraulics Code (RCW 7755) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineer regulations. G. Archaeological, Cultural and Historical Resources. In addition to the requirements of TMC Section 18.50.110, Archaeological /Paleontological Information Preservation Requirements, the following regulations apply 1. All land use permits for projects within the shoreline jurisdiction shall be coordinated with affected tribes. 2. If the City determines that a site has significant archaeological, natural scientific or historical value, a substantial development that would pose a threat to the resources of the site, shall not be approved. 3. Permits issued in areas documented to contain archaeological resources require a site inspection or evaluation by a professional archaeologist in coordination with affected Indian tribes. The City may require that development be postponed in such areas to allow W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 12 of 47 investigation of public acquisition potential, retrieval and preservation of significant artifacts and /or development of a mitigation plan. Areas of known or suspected archaeological middens shall not be disturbed and shall be fenced and identified during construction projects on the site. 4. Developers and property owners shall immediately stop work and notify the City of Tukwila, the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and affected Indian tribes if archaeological resources are uncovered during excavation. 5. In the event unforeseen factors constituting an emergency, as defined in RCW 90.58.030, necessitate rapid action to retrieve or preserve artifacts or data identified above, the project may be exempted from any shoreline permit requirements. The City shall notify the Washington State Department of Ecology, the State Attorney General's Office and the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Office of such an exemption in a timely manner. 6. Archaeological excavations may be permitted subject to the provision of this chapter. 7. On sites where historical or archaeological resources have been identified and will be preserved in situ, public access to such areas shall be designed and managed so as to give maximum protection to the resource and surrounding environment. 8. Interpretive signs of historical and archaeological features shall be provided subject to the requirements of the Public Access Section when such signage does not compromise the protection of these features from tampering, damage and /or destruction. H. Environmental Impact Mitigation. 1. All shoreline development and uses shall occur in a manner that results in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions through the careful location and design of all allowed development and uses. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from allowed development and uses are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this section; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. 2. To the extent Washington's State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, is applicable, the analysis of environmental impacts from proposed shoreline uses or developments shall be conducted consistent with the rules implementing SEPA (TMC Chapter 21.04 and WAC 197 -11). 3. Where required, mitigation measures shall be applied in the following sequence of steps listed in order of priority: a. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; c. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; d. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations; e. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and f. Monitoring the impact and the compensation projects and taking appropriate corrective measures. 4. In determining appropriate mitigation measures applicable to shoreline development, lower priority measures shall be applied only where higher priority measures are determined by the City to be infeasible or inapplicable. 5. When mitigation measures are appropriate pursuant to the priority of mitigation sequencing above, preferential consideration shall be given to measures that replace the impacted functions directly and in the immediate vicinity of the impact. However, if mitigation in the immediate vicinity is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, waves or other factors, then off -site mitigation within the Shoreline Jurisdiction may be allowed if consistent with the Shoreline Restoration Plan. Mitigation for projects in the Transition Zone must take place in the Transition Zone. In the event a site is not available in the Transition Zone W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 13 of 47 125 126 to carry out required mitigation, the project proponent may contribute funds equivalent to the value of the required mitigation to an existing or future restoration project identified in the CIP to be carried out by a public agency in the Transition Zone. I. Off Street Parking and Loading Requirements. In addition to the parking requirements in TMC Chapter 18.56, the following requirements apply to all development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. 1. Any parking, loading, or storage facilities located between the river and any building must incorporate additional landscaping in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section, or berming or other site planning or design techniques to reduce visual and /or environmental impacts from the parking areas utilizing the following screening techniques: a. A solid evergreen screen of trees and shrubs a minimum of six feet high; or b. Decorative fence a maximum of six feet high with landscaping. Chain link fence, where allowed, shall be vinyl coated and landscaped with native trailing vine or an approved non -native vine other than ivy, except where a security or safety hazard may exist; or c. Earth berms at a minimum of four feet high, planted with native plants in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. 2. Where a parking area is located in the Shoreline Jurisdiction and adjacent to a public access feature, the parking area shall be screened by a vegetative screen or a built structure that runs the entire length of the parking area adjacent to the amenity. The landscape screening shall comply with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. 3 Where public access to or along the shoreline exists or is proposed, parking areas shall provide pedestrian access from the parking area to the shoreline. 4. Parking facilities, loading areas and paved areas shall incorporate low impact development techniques wherever feasible, adequate stormwater retention areas, oil /water separators and biofiltration swales or other treatment techniques and shall comply with the standards and practices formally adopted by the City of Tukwila Public Works Department. J. Land Altering Activities. All land altering activities in the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall be in conjunction with an underlying land development permit, except for shoreline restoration projects. All activities shall meet the following standards: 1. Clearing, Grading and Landfill. a. Land altering shall be permitted only where it meets the following criteria: 1) The work is the minimum necessary to accomplish an allowed shoreline use; 2) Impacts to the natural environment are minimized and mitigated; 3) Water quality, river flows and /or fish habitat are not adversely affected; 4) Public access and river navigation are not diminished; 5) The project complies with all federal and state requirements; 6) The project complies with the vegetation protection criteria of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section; and 7) The project will achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions or processes. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from an otherwise allowed land altering project are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this chapter. In that event, the "no net loss" standard is met; and 8) Documentation is provided to demonstrate the fill comes from a clean source. b. Clearing, grading and landfill activities, where allowed, shall include erosion control mechanisms, and any reasonable restriction on equipment, methods or timing necessary to minimize the introduction of suspended solids or leaching of contaminants into the river, or the disturbance of wildlife or fish habitats in accordance with the standards in TMC Chapter 16.54, "Grading." 2. Dredging. a. Dredging activities must comply with all federal and state regulations. Maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins must be restricted to maintaining previously dredged and /or existing authorized location, depth, and width. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 14 of 47 b. Where allowed, dredging operations must be designed and scheduled so as to ensure no net loss to shoreline ecological functions or processes. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from allowed dredging are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this chapter; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. K. Marinas, Boat Yards, Dry Docks, Boat Launches, Piers, Docks and Other Over -water Structures. 1. General Requirements. a. Prior to issuance of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for construction of piers, docks, wharves or other over -water structures, the applicant shall present approvals from State or Federal agencies, as applicable. b. Structures must be designed by a qualified engineer and must demonstrate the project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological function and will be stable against the forces of flowing water, wave action and the wakes of passing vessels. c. In -water structures shall be designed and located to minimize shading of native aquatic vegetation and fish passage areas. Removal of shoreline, riparian and aquatic vegetation shall be limited to the minimum extent necessary to construct the project. All areas disturbed by construction shall be replanted with native vegetation as part of the project. d. New or replacement in -water structures shall be designed and located such that natural hydraulic and geologic processes, such as erosion, wave action or floods will not necessitate the following: 1) reinforcement of the shoreline or stream bank with new bulkheads or similar artificial structures to protect the in -water structure; or 2) dredging. e. No structures are allowed on top of over -water structures except for properties located north of the Turning Basin. f. Pilings or other associated structures in direct contact with water shall not be treated with preservatives unless the applicant can demonstrate that no feasible alternative to protect the materials exists and that non -wood alternatives are not economically feasible. In that case, only compounds approved for marine use may be used and must be applied by the manufacturer per current best management practices of the Western Wood Preservers Institute. The applicant must present verification that the best management practices were followed. The preservatives must also be approved by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. g. All over -water structures shall be constructed and maintained in a safe and sound condition. Abandoned or unsafe over -water structures shall be removed or repaired promptly by the owner Accumulated debris shall be regularly removed and disposed of properly so as not to jeopardize the integrity of the structure. Replacement of in -water structures shall include proper removal of abandoned or other man-made structures and debris. h. Boat owners who store motorized boats on -site are encouraged to use best management practices to avoid fuel and other fluid spills. 2. Marinas, Boat Yards and Dry Docks. a. All uses under this category shall be designed to achieve no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. In cases where impacts to shoreline ecological functions from uses allowed under this category are unavoidable, those impacts shall be mitigated according to the provisions of this chapter; in that event, the "no net loss" standard is met. b. Commercial /industrial marinas and dry docks shall be located no further upriver than Turning Basin #3. c. Marinas shall be located, designed, constructed and operated to avoid or minimize adverse impacts on fish, wildlife, water quality, native shoreline vegetation, navigation, public access, existing in -water recreational activities and adjacent water uses. d. Marinas shall submit a fuel spill prevention and contingency plan to the City for approval. Haul -out and boat maintenance facilities must meet the City's stormwater management requirements and not allow the release of chemicals, petroleum or suspended solids to the river. W: \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 15 of 47 127 128 e. Marinas, boat yards and dry docks must be located a minimum of 100 feet from fish and wildlife habitat areas (see "Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline" Map 5). f. New marinas, launch ramps and accessory uses must be located where water depths are adequate to avoid the need for dredging. 3. Boat Launches and Boat Lifts. a. Boat launch ramps and vehicle access to the ramps shall be designed to not cause erosion; the use of pervious paving materials, such as grasscrete, are encouraged. b. Boat launch ramps shall be designed to minimize areas of landfill or the need for shoreline protective structures. c. Access to the boat ramp and parking for the ramp shall be located a sufficient distance from any frontage road to provide safe maneuvering of boats and trailers. d. Launching rails shall be adequately anchored to the ground. e. Launch ramps and boat lifts shall extend waterward past the OHWM only as far as necessary to achieve their purpose. f. Boat lifts and canopies must meet the standards of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regional General Permit Number 1 for Watercraft Lifts in Fresh and Marine /Estuarine Waters within the State of Washington. 4. Over -water Structures. Where allowed, over -water structures such as piers, wharves and docks shall meet the following standards: a. The size of new over -water structures shall be limited to the minimum necessary to support the structure's intended use and to provide stability in the case of floating docks. Structures must be compatible with any existing channel control or flood management structures. b. Over -water structures shall not extend waterward of the OHWM any more than necessary to permit launching of watercraft, while also ensuring that watercraft do not rest on tidal substrate at any time. c. Adverse impacts of over -water structures on water quality, river flows, fish habitat, shoreline vegetation, and public access shall be minimized and mitigated. Mitigation measures may include joint use of existing structures, open decking or piers, replacement of non -native vegetation, installation of in -water habitat features or restoration of shallow water habitat. d. Any proposals for in -water or over -water structures shall provide a pre construction habitat evaluation, including an evaluation of salmonid and bull trout habitat and shoreline ecological functions, and demonstrate how the project achieves no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. e. Over -water structures shall obtain all necessary state and federal permits prior to construction or repair. f. All over -water structures must be designed by a qualified engineer to ensure they are adequately anchored to the bank in a manner so as not to cause future downstream hazards or significant modifications to the river geomorphology and are able to withstand high flows. g. Over -water structures shall not obstruct normal public use of the river for navigation or recreational purposes. h. Shading impacts to fish shall be minimized by using grating on at least 30% of the surface area of the over -water structure on residential areas and at least 50% of the over water structure on all other properties. The use of skirting is not permitted. i. If floats are used, the flotation shall be fully enclosed and contained in a shell (such as polystyrene) that prevents breakup or loss of the flotation material into the water, damage from ultraviolet radiation, and damage from rubbing against pilings or waterborne debris. j. Floats may not rest on the tidal substrate at any time and stoppers on the piling anchoring the floats must be installed to ensure at least 1 foot of clearance above the substrate. Anchor lines may not rest on the substrate at any time. W.\ Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 16 of 47 k. The number of pilings to support over -water structures, including floats, shall be limited to the minimum necessary. Pilings shall conform to the pilings standards contained in the US Army Corps of Engineers Regional General Permit No. 6. I. No over -water structure shall be located closer than five feet from the side property line extended, except that such structures may abut property lines for the common use of adjacent property owners when mutually agreed upon by the property owners in an easement recorded with King County. A copy of this agreement shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development and accompany an application for a development permit and/or Shoreline Permit. Section 8. Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.080 Vegetation Protection and Landscaping A. Purpose, Objectives and Applicability. 1. The purpose of this section is to: a. Regulate the protection of existing trees and native vegetation in the Shoreline Jurisdiction; b. Establish requirements for removal of invasive plants at the time of development or re- development of sites; c. Establish requirements for landscaping for new development or re- development; and d. Establish requirements for the long -term maintenance of native vegetation to prevent establishment of invasive species and promote shoreline ecosystem processes. 2. The City's goal is to: a. Preserve as many existing trees as possible and increase the number of native trees, shrubs and other vegetation in the shoreline because of their importance to shoreline ecosystem functions as listed below. 1) Overhead tree canopy to provide shade for water temperature control, 2) Habitat for birds, insects and small mammals; 3) Vegetation that overhangs the river to provide places for fish to shelter; 4) Source of insects for fish; 5) Filtering of pollutants and slowing of stormwater prior to its entering the river; and 6) A long -term source of woody debris for the river. b. In addition, trees and other native vegetation are important for aesthetics. It is the City's goal that unsightly invasive vegetation, such as blackberries, be removed from the shoreline and be replaced with native vegetation to promote greater enjoyment of and access to the river. c. The City will provide information and technical assistance to property owners for improving vegetation in the Shoreline Jurisdiction and will work collaboratively with local citizen groups to assist property owners in the removal of invasive vegetation and planting of native vegetation, particularly for residential areas. 3. With the exception of residential development /re- development of four or fewer residential units, all activities and developments within the Shoreline Environment must comply with the landscaping and maintenance requirements of this section, whether or not a shoreline substantial development permit is required. Single family residential projects are not exempt if implementing a shoreline stabilization project on the shoreline. 4. The tree protection and retention requirements apply to existing uses as well as new or re- development. B. Tree Protection, Retention and Replacement. 1. As many significant trees and as much native vegetation as possible are to be retained on a site proposed for development or re- development, taking into account the condition and age of the trees. As part of design review, the Director of Community Development or the Board of Architectural Review may require alterations in the arrangement of buildings, parking or other elements of proposed development in order to retain significant W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 17 of 47 129 130 non invasive trees, particularly those that provide shading to the river. Trees located on properties not undergoing development or re- development may not be removed except those that interfere with access and passage on public trails or that present an imminent hazard to existing structures or the public. If the hazard is not readily apparent, the City may require an evaluation by an International Society of Arborists (ISA)- certified arborist. 2. To protect the ecological functions that trees and native vegetation provide to the shoreline, removal of any significant tree or native vegetation in the Shoreline Jurisdiction requires a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit and is generally only allowed on sites undergoing development or re- development. Only trees that interfere with access and passage on public trails or trees that present an imminent hazard to existing structures or the public may be removed from sites without an issued building permit or Federal approval. Factors that will be considered in approving tree removal include, but are not limited to: tree condition and health, age, risks to structures, and potential for root or canopy interference with utilities. 3. Prior to any tree removal or site clearing, a Type 2 Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit application must be submitted to the Department of Community Development (DCD) containing the following information: a. A vegetation survey on a site plan that shows the diameter, species and location of all significant trees and all existing native vegetation; b. A site plan that shows trees and native vegetation to be retained and trees to be removed and provides a table showing the number of significant trees to be removed and the number of replacement trees required; c. Tree protection zones and other measures to protect any trees or native vegetation that are to be retained for sites undergoing development or re- development; d. Location of the OHWM, river buffer, Shoreline Jurisdiction boundary and any sensitive areas with their buffers; e. A landscape plan that shows diameter, species name, spacing and planting location for any required replacement trees and other proposed vegetation; f. An arborist evaluation justifying the removal of hazardous trees if required by DCD; and g. An application fee per the current Land Use Permit Fee resolution. 4. Where permitted, significant trees that are removed from the shoreline shall be replaced pursuant to the tree replacement requirements shown below, up to a density of 100 trees per acre (including existing trees). The Director or Planning Commission may require additional trees or shrubs to be installed to mitigate any potential impact from the loss of this vegetation as a result of new development. Tree Replacement Requirements Diameter* of Tree Removed *measured at height of 4 feet from the ground) 4 -6 inches (single trunk); 2 inches (any trunk of a multi-trunk tree) Over 6 -8 inches Over 8 -20 inches Over 20 inches W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Number of Replacement Trees Required 3 4 6 8 5. The property owner is required to ensure the viability and long -term health of trees planted for replacement through proper care and maintenance for the life of the project. Replaced trees that do not survive must be replanted in the next appropriate season for planting. 6. If all required replacement trees cannot be reasonably accommodated on the site, off -site tree replacement within the shoreline jurisdiction may be allowed at a site approved by the City. Priority for off -site tree planting will be at locations within the Transition Zone. If no suitable off -site location is available, the applicant shall pay into a tree replacement fund. The fee shall be based on the value of the replacement trees and their delivery, labor for site preparation and plant installation, soil amendments, mulch, and staking supplies. 7. When a tree suitable for use as LWD is permitted to be removed from the shoreline buffer, the tree trunk and root ball (where possible) will be saved for use in a restoration project Page 18 of 47 elsewhere in the shoreline jurisdiction. The applicant will be responsible for the cost of moving the removed tree(s) to a location designated by the City. If no restoration project or storage location is available at the time, the Director may waive this requirement. Trees removed in the shoreline jurisdiction outside the buffer shall be placed as LWD in the buffer (not on the bank), if feasible. Priority for LWD placement projects will be in the Transition Zone. 8. Dead or dying trees located within the buffer or undeveloped upland portion of the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall be left in place as wildlife snags, unless they present a hazard to structures, facilities or the public. 9. Topping of trees is prohibited unless absolutely necessary to protect overhead utility lines. Topping of trees will be regulated as removal and tree replacement will be required. 10. For new development or re- development where trees are proposed for retention, tree protection zones shall be indicated on site plans and shall be established in the field prior to commencement of any construction or site clearing activity. A minimum 4 feet high construction barrier shall be installed around significant trees and stands of native trees or vegetation to be retained. Minimum distances from the trunk for the construction barriers shall be based on the approximate age of the tree (height and canopy) as follows: a. Young trees (have reached less than 20% of life expectancy): 0.75 feet per inch of trunk diameter b. Mature trees (have reached 20 -80% of life expectancy): 1 foot per inch of trunk diameter. c. Over mature trees (have reached greater than 80% of life expectancy): 1.5 feet per inch of trunk diameter. C. Landscaping. This section presents landscaping standards for the Shoreline Jurisdiction and is divided into a general section and separate sections for the River Buffer and for the remaining part of the Shoreline Jurisdiction for each environment designation. 1. General Requirements. For any new development or re- development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction, except single family residential development of four or fewer lots, invasive vegetation must be removed and native vegetation planted and maintained in the River Buffer, including the riverbank. a. The landscaping requirements of this subsection apply for any new development or redevelopment in the Shoreline Jurisdiction, except: single family residential development of 4 or fewer lots. The extent of landscaping required will depend on the size of the proposed project. New development or full redevelopment of a site will require landscaping of the entire site. For smaller projects, the Director will review the intent of this section and the scope of the project to determine a reasonable amount of landscaping to be carried out. Trees and other vegetation shading the river shall be retained or replanted when riprap is placed per the approved tree permit, if required. b. Invasive vegetation must be removed as part of site preparation and native vegetation planted, including the river bank. c. On properties located behind publicly maintained levees, an applicant is not required to remove invasive vegetation, or plant native vegetation within the buffer. d. Removal of invasive species shall be done by hand or with hand -held power tools. Where not feasible and mechanized equipment is needed, the applicant must obtain a Shoreline Tree Removal and Vegetation Clearing Permit and show how the slope stability of the bank will be maintained and a plan must be submitted indicating how the work will be done and what erosion control and tree protection features will be utilized. Federal and State permits may be required for vegetation removal with mechanized equipment. e. Trees and other vegetation shading the river shall be retained or replanted when riprap is placed as specified in the approved tree permit, if a permit is required. f. Removal of invasive vegetation may be phased over several years prior to planting if such phasing is provided for by a plan approved by the Director to allow for alternative approaches, such as sheet mulching and goat grazing. The method selected shall not destabilize the bank or cause erosion. g. A combination of native trees, shrubs and groundcovers (including grasses, sedges, rushes and vines) shall be planted. The plants listed in the Riparian Restoration and Management Table of the 2004 Washington Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines (Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Ecology, and U.S. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 19 of 47 131 132 Fish and Wildlife Service, Olympia, Washington, as amended) shall provide the basis for plant selection. Site conditions, such as topography, exposure, and hydrology shall be taken into account for plant selection. Other species may be approved if there is adequate justification. h. Non -native trees may be used as street trees in cases where conditions are not appropriate for native trees (for example where there are space or height limitations or conflicts with utilities). i. Plants shall meet the current American Standard for Nursery Stock (American Nursery and Landscape Association ANLA). j. Plant sizes in the non buffer areas of all Shoreline Environments shall meet the following minimum size standards: Deciduous trees: 2 inch caliper Conifers: 6 -8 foot height Shrubs: 24 inch height Groundcover /grasses: 4 inch or one gallon container k. Smaller plant sizes (generally one gallon, bareroot, plugs, or stakes, depending on plant species) are preferred for buffer plantings. Willow stakes must be at least 1/2 -inch in diameter. 1. Site preparation and planting of vegetation shall be in accordance with best management practices for ensuring the vegetation's long -term health and survival. m. Plants may be selected and placed to allow for public and private view corridors and /or access to the water's edge. n. Native vegetation in the shoreline installed in accordance with the preceding standards shall be maintained by the property owner to promote healthy growth and prevent establishment of invasive species. Invasive plants (such as blackberry, ivy, knotweed, bindweed) shall be removed on a regular basis, according to the approved maintenance plan. o. Areas disturbed by removal of invasive plants shall be replanted with native vegetation where necessary to maintain the density shown in TMC Section 18.44.080B4, and must be replanted in a timely manner, except where a long -term removal and re- vegetation plan, as approved by the City, is being implemented. p. The following standards apply to utilities and loading docks located in the Shoreline Jurisdiction: 1) Utilities such as pumps, pipes, etc. shall be suitably screened with native vegetation; 2) Utility easements shall be landscaped with native groundcover, grasses or other low- growing plants as appropriate to the shoreline environment and site conditions; 3) Allowed loading docks and service areas located waterward of the development shall have landscaping that provides extensive visual separation from the river. 2. River Buffer Landscaping Requirements in all Shoreline Environments. The River Buffer in all shoreline environments shall function, in part, as a vegetation management area to filter sediment, capture contaminants in surface water run -off, reduce the velocity of water run- off, and provide fish and wildlife habitat. a. A planting plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect or an approved biologist shall be submitted to the City for approval showing plant species, size, number and spacing. The requirement for a landscape architect or biologist may be waived by the Director for single- family property owners (when planting is being required as mitigation for construction of overwater structures or shoreline stabilization), if the property owner accepts technical assistance from City staff. b. Plants shall be installed from the OHWM to the upland edge of the River Buffer unless site conditions would make planting unsafe. c. Plantings close to and on the bank shall include native willows, red osier dogwood and other native vegetation that will extend out over the water, to provide shade and habitat functions when mature. Species selected must be able to withstand seasonal water level fluctuations. d. Minimum plant spacing in the buffer shall follow the River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Table, shown in TMC Section 18.44.080(C)(2). Existing non invasive plants may be included in the density calculations. W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 20 of 47 e. Irrigation for buffer plantings is required for at least two dry seasons or until plants are established. An irrigation plan is to be included as part of the planting plan. f. In the event a development project allows for setback and benching of the shoreline along an existing levee or revetment, the newly created mid -slope bench area shall be planted and maintained with a variety of native vegetation appropriate for site conditions. River Buffer Vegetation Planting Densities Plant Material Type Stakes /cuttings along riverbank (willows, red osier dogwood) Shrubs Trees Groundcovers, grasses, sedges, rushes, other herbaceous plants Native seed mixes Planting Density 1 -2 feet on center or per bioengineering method 3 -5 feet on center, depending on species 15 -20 feet on center, depending on species 1 -1.5 feet on center, depending on species 5 -25 pounds per acre, depending on species 3. Landscaping Requirements for the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity Environments Outside of the River Buffer. For the portions of property within the Shoreline Jurisdiction landward of the River Buffer, the landscape requirements in the "General" section of this chapter and the requirements for the underlying zoning as established in TMC Chapter 18.52 shall apply except as indicated below. a. Parking Lot Landscape Perimeters. One native tree for each 20 lineal feet of required perimeter landscaping, one shrub for each four lineal feet of required perimeter landscaping, and native groundcovers to cover 90% of the landscape area within three years, planted at a minimum spacing of 12 inches on- center. b. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping. Every 300 square feet of paved surface requires ten square feet of interior landscaping within landscape islands separated by no more than 150 feet between islands. c. Landscaping shall be provided at yards not adjacent to the river, with the same width as required in the underlying zoning district. This standard may be reduced as follows: 1) Where development provides public access corridor between off -site public area(s) and public shoreline areas, side yard landscaping may be reduced by 25% to no less than 3 feet; or 2) Where development provides additional public access area(s) (as allowed by the High Intensity and Urban Conservancy Environment Development Standards) equal in area to at least 2.5% of total building area, front yard landscaping may be reduced by 25 D. Vegetation Management in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The requirements of this section apply to all existing and new development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. 1. Trees and shrubs may only be pruned for safety, to maintain view or access corridors and trails by pruning up or on the sides of trees, to maintain clearance for utility lines, and /or for improving shoreline ecological function. This type of pruning is exempt from any permit requirements. Topping of trees is prohibited except where absolutely necessary to avoid interference with existing utilities. 2. Plant debris from removal of invasive plants or pruning shall be removed from the site and disposed of properly. 3. Use of pesticides: a. Pesticides (including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides) shall not be used in the Shoreline Jurisdiction except where: 1) Alternatives such as manual removal, biological control, and cultural control are not feasible given the size of the infestation, site characteristics, or the characteristics of the invasive plant species; 2) The use of pesticides has been approved through a comprehensive vegetation or pest management and monitoring plan; 3) The pesticide is applied in accordance with State regulations; 4) The proposed herbicide is approved for aquatic use by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CLsksn 12/09/2009 Page 21 of 47 133 134 5) The use of pesticides in the Shoreline Jurisdiction is approved in writing by the City and the applicant presents a copy of the Aquatic Pesticide Permit issued by the Department of Ecology or Washington Department of Agriculture. b. Self contained rodent bait boxes designed to prevent access by other animals are allowed. c. Sports fields, parks, golf courses and other outdoor recreational uses that involve maintenance of extensive areas of turf shall provide and implement an integrated turf management program or integrated pest management plan designed to ensure that water quality in the river is not adversely impacted. Section 9. Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.090 Environmentally Sensitive Areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. A. Purpose. 1. The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) requires protection of critical areas (sensitive areas), defined as wetlands, watercourses, frequently flooded areas, geologically hazardous areas, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife conservation areas, and abandoned mine areas. 2. The purpose of protecting environmentally sensitive areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction is to: a. Minimize developmental impacts on the natural functions and values of these areas. b. Protect quantity and quality of water resources. c. Minimize turbidity and pollution of wetlands and fish bearing waters and maintain wildlife habitat. d. Prevent erosion and the loss of slope and soil stability caused by the removal of trees, shrubs, and the root systems of vegetative cover. e. Protect the public against avoidable losses, public emergency rescue and relief operations cost, and subsidy cost of public mitigation from landslide, subsidence, erosion and flooding. f. Protect the community's aesthetic resources and distinctive features of natural lands and wooded hillsides. g. Balance the private rights of individual property owners with the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas. h. Prevent the loss of wetland and watercourse function and acreage, and strive for a gain over present conditions. i. Give special consideration to conservation or protection measures necessary to protect or enhance anadromous fisheries. j. Incorporate the use of best available science in the regulation and protection of sensitive areas as required by the State Growth Management Act, according to WAC 365 -195- 900 through 365 195 -925 and WAC 365 190 -080. 3. The goal of these sensitive area regulations is to achieve no net loss of wetland, watercourse, or fish and wildlife conservation area or their functions. B. Applicability, Maps and Inventories. 1. Sensitive areas located in the Shoreline Jurisdiction are regulated by the SMP and this chapter. However, the level of protection for the sensitive areas located in the shoreline jurisdiction shall be at least equal to that provided in the Sensitive Areas section of the Zoning Code (TMC Chapter 18.45). 2. Sensitive areas currently identified in the Shoreline Jurisdiction are discussed in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report, which forms part of the City's SMP. The locations are mapped on the "Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction," Map 5. This map is based on assessment of current conditions and review of the best available information. However, additional sensitive areas may exist within the Shoreline Jurisdiction and the boundaries of the sensitive areas shown are not exact. It is the responsibility of the property owner to determine the presence of sensitive areas on the property and to verify the boundaries W \Word Processing\ Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 22 of 47 in the field. Sensitive area provisions for abandoned mine areas do not apply as none of these areas is located in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. 3. Sensitive areas comprised of frequently flooded areas and areas of seismic instability are regulated by the Flood Zone Management Code (TMC Chapter 16.52) and the Washington State Building Code, rather than by Section 18.44.090 of this chapter. C. Best Available Science. Policies, regulations and decisions concerning sensitive areas shall rely on Best Available Science to protect the sensitive areas functions and values. Special consideration must be given to the conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fish and their habitats. Nonscientific information may supplement scientific information, but is not an adequate substitution for valid and available scientific information. D. Sensitive Area Studies. An applicant for a development proposal that may include a sensitive area and /or its buffer shall submit those studies as required by the City and specified below to adequately identify and evaluate the sensitive area and its buffers. 1. General Requirements a. A required sensitive areas study shall be prepared by a person with experience and training in the scientific discipline appropriate for the relevant sensitive area. A qualified professional must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent degree in ecology or related science, engineering, environmental studies, fisheries, geotechnical or related field, and at least two years of related work experience. b. The sensitive areas study shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of sensitive area data and shall use field reconnaissance and reference the source of science used. The sensitive areas study shall evaluate the proposal and all probable impacts to sensitive areas. c. It is intended that sensitive areas studies and information be utilized by applicants in preparation of their proposals and therefore shall be undertaken early in the design stages of a project. 2. Wetland, Watercourse and Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area Sensitive Area Studies. At a minimum, the sensitive areas study shall contain the following information, as applicable: a. The name and contact information of the applicant, a description of the proposal, and identification of the permit requested, b. A copy of the site plan for the development proposal showing: sensitive areas and buffers and the development proposal with dimensions, clearing limits, proposed stormwater management plan, and mitigation plan for impacts due to drainage alterations; c. The dates, names and qualifications of the persons preparing the study and documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site; d. Identification and characterization of all sensitive areas, water bodies, and buffers adjacent to the proposed project area or potentially impacted by the proposed project; e. A statement specifying the accuracy of the study and assumptions used in the study; f. Determination of the degree of impact and risk from the proposal both on the site and on adjacent properties; g. An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to sensitive areas, their buffers and other properties resulting from the proposal; h. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing in order to avoid, minimize and mitigate impacts to sensitive areas; i. Plans for adequate mitigation to offset any impacts; j. Recommendations for maintenance, short -term and long -term monitoring, contingency plans and bonding measures; and k. Any technical information required by the director to assist in determining compliance. 3. Geotechnical Studies. W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 23 of 47 135 136 a. A geotechnical study appropriate both to the site conditions and the proposed development shall be required for development in Class 2, Class 3, and Class 4 Areas. b. All studies shall include at a minimum a site evaluation, review of available information regarding the site and a surface reconnaissance of the site and adjacent areas. For Class 2 areas, subsurface exploration of site conditions is at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. In addition, for Class 3 and Class 4 Areas, the study shall include a feasibility analysis for the use of infiltration on -site and a subsurface exploration of soils and hydrology conditions. Detailed slope stability analysis shall be done if the geotechnical engineer recommends it in Class 3 areas, and must be done in Class 4 areas. c. Applicants shall retain a geotechrdcal engineer to prepare the reports and evaluations required in this subsection. The geotechnical report and completed site evaluation checklist shall be prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical practices, under the supervision of and signed and stamped by the geotechnical engineer. The report shall be prepared in consultation with the appropriate City department. Where appropriate, a geologist must be included as part of the geotechnical consulting team. The report shall make specific recommendations concerning development of the site. d. The opinions and recommendations contained in the report shall be supported by field observations and, where appropriate or applicable, by literature review conducted by the geotechnical engineer, which shall include appropriate explorations such as borings or test pits, and an analysis of soil characteristics conducted by or under the supervision of the engineer in accordance with standards of the American Society of Testing and Materials or other applicable standards. If the evaluation involves geologic evaluations or interpretations, the report shall be reviewed and approved by a geotechnical engineer. 4. Modifications or Waivers to Sensitive Area Study Requirements. a. The Director may limit the required geographic area of the sensitive area study as appropriate if: 1) The applicant, with assistance from the City, cannot obtain permission to access properties adjacent to the project area; or 2) The proposed activity will affect only a limited part of the site. b. The Director may allow modifications to the required contents of the study where, in the judgment of a qualified professional, more or less information is required to adequately address the potential sensitive area impacts and required mitigation. c. If there is written agreement between the Director and the applicant concerning the sensitive area classification and type, the Director may waive the requirement for sensitive area studies provided that no adverse impacts to sensitive areas or buffers will result. There must be substantial evidence that the sensitive areas delineation and classification are correct, that there will be no detrimental impact to the sensitive areas or buffers, and that the goals, purposes, objectives and requirements of the SMP will be followed. E. Procedures. When an applicant submits an application for any building permit, subdivision, short subdivision or any other land use review that approves a use, development or future construction, the location and dimensions of all sensitive areas and buffers on the site shall be indicated on the plans submitted. When a sensitive area is identified, the following procedures apply. 1. The applicant shall submit the relevant sensitive area study as required by this chapter 2. The Department of Community Development will review the information submitted in the sensitive area studies to verify the information, confirm the nature and type of the sensitive area, and ensure the study is consistent with the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). At the discretion of the Director, sensitive area studies may undergo peer review, at the expense of the applicant. 3. Denial of use or development: A use or development will be denied if the Director determines the applicant cannot ensure that potential dangers and costs to future inhabitants of the development, adjacent properties, and Tukwila are minimized and mitigated to an acceptable level. 4. Preconstruction meeting: The applicant, specialist(s) of record, contractor, and department representatives will be required to attend pre construction meetings prior to any work on the site. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 24 of 47 5. Construction monitoring. The specialist(s) of record shall be retained to monitor the site during construction. 6. On -site Identification: The Director may require the boundary between a sensitive area and its buffer or between the buffer and any development or use to be permanently identified with fencing, or with a wood or metal sign with treated wood, concrete or metal posts. Size will be determined at the time of permitting, and wording shall be as follows: "Protection of this natural area is in your care. Do not alter or disturb. Please call the City of Tukwila (206- 431 -3670) for more information." F. Wetland Determinations and Classifications. 1. Wetlands and their boundaries are established by using the Washington State Wetland and Delineation Manual, as required by RCW 36.70A.175 (Ecology Publication #96 -94) and consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. 2. Wetland determinations shall be made by a qualified professional (certified Wetland Scientist or non certified with at least two years of full -time work experience as a wetland professional). 3. Wetland areas within the City of Tukwila have certain characteristics, functions and values and have been influenced by urbanization and related disturbances. Wetland functions include, but are not limited to the following: improving water quality; maintaining hydrologic functions (reducing peak flows, decreasing erosion, groundwater); and providing habitat for plants, mammals, fish, birds, and amphibians. Wetland functions shall be evaluated using the Washington State Functional Assessment Method. 4. Wetlands shall be designated in accordance with the Washington State Wetlands Rating system (Washington Department of Ecology, August 2004, Publication #93 -74) as Category I, II, III or W as listed below: a. Category I wetlands are those that: 1) represent a unique or rare wetland type; or 2) are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; or 3) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or 4) provide a high level of functions. The following types of wetlands listed by Washington Department of Ecology and potentially found in Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction are Category I a) Estuarine wetlands (deepwater tidal habitats with a range of fresh brackish- marine water chemistry and daily tidal cycles, salt and brackish marshes, intertidal mudflats, mangrove swamps, bays, sounds, and coastal rivers). b) Wetlands that perform many functions well and score at least 70 points in the Western Washington Wetlands Rating System. c) Waterfowl or shorebird areas designated by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. b. Category II wetlands are difficult, though not impossible to replace and provide high levels of some functions. These wetlands occur more commonly than Category I wetlands, but still need a relatively high level of protection. Category II wetlands potentially in Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction include: 1) Estuarine Wetlands Any estuarine wetland smaller than an acre, or those that are disturbed and larger than 1 acre are category II wetlands. 2) Wetlands that Perform Functions Well Wetlands scoring between 51 -69 points (out of 100) on the questions related to the functions present are Category II wetlands. c. Category III wetlands have a moderate level of functions (scores between 30 -50 points). Wetlands scoring between 30 -50 points generally have been disturbed in some ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. d. Category P1 wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scores less than 30 points) and are often heavily disturbed. While these are wetlands that should be able to be replaced or improved, they still need protection because they may provide some important functions. Any disturbance of these wetlands must be considered on a case by case basis. W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 25 of 47 137 138 G. Watercourse Designation and Ratings. 1. Watercourse ratings are based on the existing habitat functions and are rated as follows: a. Type 1 Watercourse: Watercourses inventoried as Shorelines of the State under RCW 90.58 (Green /Duwamish River). b. Type 2 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have either perennial (year- round) or intermittent flows and support salmonid fish use. c. Type 3 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have perennial flows and are not used by salmonid fish. d. Type 4 Watercourse: Those watercourses that have intermittent flows and are not used by salmonid fish. 2. Watercourse sensitive area studies shall be performed by a qualified professional (hydrologist, geologist, engineer or other scientist with experience in preparing watercourse assessments). H. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. 1. Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas within the Shoreline Jurisdiction include the habitats listed below: a. Areas with which endangered, threatened, and sensitive species have a primary association; b. Habitats and species of local importance, including but not limited to bald eagle habitat, heron rookeries, and osprey nesting areas; c. Waters of the State (i.e., the Green Duwamish River itself); d. State natural area preserves and natural resource conservation areas; and e. Areas critical for habitat connectivity. 2. The approximate location and extent of known fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are identified in the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report and are shown on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction map. Only the salmon habitat enhancement project sites completed or underway are shown as Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Map. Streams are shown as watercourses. The river is not shown as a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area for the sake of simplicity. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas correlate closely with the areas identified as regulated watercourses and wetlands and their buffers, as well as off channel habitat areas created to improve salmon habitat (shown on the Sensitive Areas Map) in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The Green /Duwamish River is recognized as the most significant fish and wildlife habitat corridor. In addition, Gilliam Creek, Riverton Creek, Southgate Creek, Hamm Creek (in the North Potential Annexation Area (PAA)), and Johnson Creek (South PAA) all provide salmonid habitat. I. Wetland Watercourse and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area Buffers. 1. Purpose and Intent of Buffer Establishment. a. A buffer area shall be established adjacent to designated sensitive areas. The purpose of the buffer area shall be to protect the integrity, functions and values of the sensitive areas. Any land alteration must be located out of the buffer areas as required by this section. b. Buffers are intended in general to: 1) Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing sensitive areas; 2) Protect sensitive areas from adverse impacts during development; 3) Preserve the edges of wetlands and the banks of watercourses and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas for their critical habitat value; 4) Provide an area to stabilize banks, to absorb overflow during high water events and to allow for slight variation of aquatic system boundaries over time due to hydrologic or climatic effects; 5) Provide shading to watercourses and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas to maintain stable water temperatures and provide vegetative cover for additional wildlife habitat; W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 26 of 47 6) Provide input of organic debris and nutrient transport in watercourses; 7) Reduce erosion and increased surface water run -off; 8) Reduce loss of or damage to property; 9) Intercept fine sediments from surface water run -off and serve to minimize water quality impacts; and 10) Protect the sensitive area from human and domestic animal disturbances. 2. Establishment of Buffer Widths. The following standard buffers shall be established. a. Wetland buffers (measured from the wetland edge): 1) Category I and II Wetland. 100 -foot buffer. 2) Category III Wetland: 80 -foot buffer. 3) Category W Wetland: 50 -foot buffer. b. Watercourse buffers (measured from the OHWM): 1) Type 1 Watercourse: The buffer width for the Green /Duwamish River is established in the Shoreline Environment Designations of this SMP for the three designated shoreline environments. 2) Type 2 Watercourse: 100 foot -wide buffer 3) Type 3 Watercourse: 80- foot -wide buffer. 4) Type 4 Watercourse: 50- foot -wide buffer. c. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas: The buffer will be the same as the river buffer established for each Shoreline Environment measured from the OHWM, unless an alternate buffer is established and approved at the time a fish and wildlife habitat restoration project is undertaken. 3. Sensitive Area Buffer Setbacks. All commercial and industrial buildings shall be set back 15 feet and all other development shall be set back ten feet from the sensitive area buffer's edge. The building setbacks shall be measured from the foundation to the buffer's edge. Building plans shall also identify a 20 -foot area beyond the buffer setback within which the impacts of development will be reviewed. The Director may waive setback requirements when a site plan demonstrates there will be no adverse impacts to the buffer from construction or occasional maintenance activities. 4. Reduction of Standard Buffer Width. Except for the Green Duwamish River (Type 1 watercourse for which any variation in the buffer shall be regulated under the shoreline provisions of this program), the buffer width may be reduced on a case -by -case basis, provided the reduced buffer area does not contain slopes 15% or greater In no case shall the approved buffer width result in greater than a 50% reduction in width. Buffer reduction with enhancement may be allowed as part of a Substantial Development Permit if: a. Additional protection to wetlands or watercourses will be provided through the implementation of a buffer enhancement plan; b. The existing condition of the buffer is degraded; c. Buffer enhancement includes, but is not limited to, the following: 1) Planting vegetation that would increase value for fish and wildlife habitat or improve water quality; 2) Enhancement of wildlife habitat by incorporating structures that are likely to be used by wildlife, including wood duck boxes, bat boxes, snags, root wads /stumps, birdhouses and heron nesting areas; or 3) Removing non -native plant species and noxious weeds from the buffer area and replanting the area. 5. Increase in Standard Buffer Width. Buffers for sensitive areas will be increased when they are determined to be particularly sensitive to disturbance or the proposed development will create unusually adverse impacts. Any increase in the width of the buffer shall be required only after completion of a sensitive areas study by a qualified biologist that documents the basis for such increased width. An increase in buffer width may be appropriate when: a. The development proposal has the demonstrated potential for significant adverse impacts upon the sensitive area that can be mitigated by an increased buffer width; or W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 27 of 47 139 140 b. The area serves as habitat for endangered, threatened, sensitive or monitor species listed by the federal government or the State. 6. Maintenance of Vegetation in Buffers. Every reasonable effort shall be made to maintain any existing viable native plant life in the buffers. Vegetation may be removed from the buffer as part of an enhancement plan approved by the Director. Enhancements will ensure that slope stability and wetland or watercourse quality will be maintained or improved. Any disturbance of the buffers shall be replanted with a diverse plant community of native northwest species that are appropriate for the specific site as determined by the Director. If the vegetation must be removed, or the vegetation becomes damaged or dies because of the alterations of the landscape, then the applicant for a permit must replace existing vegetation with comparable specimens, approved by the Director, which will restore buffer functions within five years. Areas of Potential Geologic Instability. 1. Classification. Areas of potential geologic instability are classified as follows: a. Class 1 areas, where landslide potential is low, and which slope is less than 15 b. Class 2 areas, where landslide potential is moderate, which slope is between 15% and 40%, and which are underlain by relatively permeable soils; c. Class 3 areas, where landslide potential is high, which include areas sloping between 15% and 40 and which are underlain by relatively impermeable soils or by bedrock, and which also include all areas sloping more steeply than 40 d. Class 4 areas, where landslide potential is very high, which include sloping areas with mappable zones of groundwater seepage, and which also include existing mappable landslide deposits regardless of slope. 2. Exemptions. The following areas are exempt from regulation as geologically hazardous areas: a. Temporary stockpiles of topsoil, gravel, beauty bark or other similar landscaping or construction materials. b. Slopes related to materials used as an engineered pre -load for a building pad. c. Any temporary slope that has been created through legal grading activities under an approved permit may be re- graded. d. Roadway embankments within right -of -way or road easements. e. Slopes retained by approved engineered structures, except riverbank structures and armoring. 3. Geotechrtical Study Required. a. Development or alterations to areas of potential geologic instability that form the riverbanks shall be governed by the policies and requirements of the Shoreline Stabilization Section of this chapter. Development proposals on all other lands containing or threatened by an area of potential geologic instability Class 2 or higher shall be subject to a geotechnical study. The geotechnical report shall analyze and make recommendations on the need for and width of any setbacks or buffers necessary to insure slope stability. Development proposals shall then include the buffer distances as defined within the geotechnical report. The geotechnical study shall be performed by a qualified professional geotechnical engineer, licensed in the State of Washington. b. Prior to permitting alteration of an area of potential geologic instability, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: 1) There is no evidence of past instability or earth movement in the vicinity of the proposed development and, where appropriate, quantitative analysis of slope stability indicates no significant risk to the proposed development or surrounding properties; or 2) The area of potential geologic instability can be modified or the project can be designed so any potential impact to the project and surrounding properties is eliminated, slope stability is not decreased, and the increase in surface water discharge or sedimentation shall not decrease slope stability. 4. Buffers for Areas of Potential Geologic Instability a. Buffers are intended to: 1• W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 28 of 47 1) Minimize long -term impacts of development on properties containing sensitive areas; 2) Protect sensitive areas from adverse impacts during development; 3) Prevent loading of potentially unstable slope formations; 4) Protect slope stability; 5) Provide erosion control and attenuation of precipitation, surface water and stormwater runoff; 6) Reduce loss of or damage to property; and 7) Prevent the need for future shoreline armoring. b. Buffers may be increased by the Director when an area is determined to be particularly sensitive to the disturbance created by a development. Such a decision will be based on a City review of the report as prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer and by a site visit. 5. Additional Requirements. a. Where any portion of an area of potential geologic instability is cleared for development, a landscaping plan for the site shall include tree replanting in accordance with the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section of this SMP. Vegetation shall be sufficient to provide erosion and stabilization protection. b. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to submit, consistent with the findings of the geotechnical report, structural plans that were prepared and stamped by a structural engineer. The plans and specifications shall be accompanied by a letter from the geotechnical engineer who prepared the geotechnical report stating that in his /her judgment, the plans and specifications conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report, the risk of damage to the proposed development site from soil instability will be minimal subject to the conditions set forth in the report, and the proposed development will not increase the potential for soil movement. c. Further recommendations signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer shall be provided should there be additions or exceptions to the original recommendations based on the plans, site conditions or other supporting data. If the geotechnical engineer who reviews the plans and specifications is not the same engineer who prepared the geotechnical report, the new engineer shall, in a letter to the City accompanying the plans and specifications, express his or her agreement or disagreement with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and state that the plans and specifications conform to his or her recommendations. d. The architect or structural engineer shall submit to the City, with the plans and specifications, a letter or notation on the design drawings at the time of permit application stating that he or she has reviewed the geotechnical report, understands its recommendations, has explained or has had explained to the owner the risks of loss due to slides on the site, and has incorporated into the design the recommendations of the report and established measures to reduce the potential risk of injury or damage that might be caused by any earth movement predicted in the report. e. The owner shall execute a Sensitive Areas Covenant and Hold Harmless Agreement running with the land, on a form provided by the City. The City will file the completed covenant with the King County Department of Records and Elections at the expense of the applicant or owner. A copy of the recorded covenant will be forwarded to the owner. f. Whenever the City determines that the public interest would not be served by the issuance of a permit in an area of potential geologic instability without assurance of a means of providing for restoration of areas disturbed by, and repair of property damage caused by, slides arising out of or occurring during construction, the Director may require assurance devices. g. Where recommended by the geotechnical report, the applicant shall retain a geotechnical engineer (preferably retain the geotechnical engineer who prepared the final geotechnical recommendations and reviewed the plans and specifications) to monitor the site during construction. If a different geotechnical engineer is retained, the new geotechnical engineer shall submit a letter to the City stating whether or not he /she agrees with the opinions and recommendations of the original study. Further recommendations, signed and sealed by the geotechnical engineer, and supporting data shall be provided should there be exceptions to the original recommendations. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 29 of 47 141 142 h. During construction the geotechnical engineer shall monitor compliance with the recommendations in the geotechnical report, particularly site excavation, shoring, soil support for foundations including piles, subdrainage installations, soil compaction and any other geotechnical aspects of the construction. Unless otherwise approved by the City, the specific recommendations contained in the soils report must be implemented. The geotechnical engineer shall provide to the City written, dated monitoring reports on the progress of the construction at such timely intervals as shall be specified. Omissions or deviations from the approved plans and specifications shall be immediately reported to the City. The final construction monitoring report shall contain a statement from the geotechnical engineer that, based upon his or her professional opinion, site observations and testing during the monitoring of the construction, the completed development substantially complies with the recommendations in the geotechnical report and with all geotechnical- related permit requirements. Occupancy of the project will not be approved until the report has been reviewed and accepted by the Director i. Substantial weight shall be given to ensuring continued slope stability and the resulting public health, safety and welfare in determining whether a development should be allowed. j. The City may impose conditions that address site -work problems which could include, but are not limited to, limiting all excavation and drainage installation to the dry season, or sequencing activities such as installing erosion control and drainage systems well in advance of construction. A permit will be denied if it is determined by the Director that the development will increase the potential of soil movement that results in an unacceptable risk of damage to the proposed development, its site or adjacent properties. K. Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses and Alterations. 1. General Sensitive Areas Permitted Uses. All uses permitted in the Shoreline Jurisdiction buffers are allowed in sensitive areas within the jurisdiction except: a. Promenades b. Recreational structures c. Public pedestrian bridges d. Vehicle bridges e. New utilities f. Plaza connectors g. Water dependent uses and their structures h. Essential streets, roads and rights -of -way i. Essential public facilities j. Outdoor storage 2. In addition, the following uses are allowed: a. Maintenance activities of existing landscaping and gardens in a sensitive area buffer including, but not limited to, mowing lawns, weeding, harvesting and replanting of garden crops and pruning and planting of vegetation. The removal of established native trees and shrubs is not permitted. Herbicide use in sensitive areas or their buffers is not allowed without written permission of the City. b. Vegetation maintenance as part of sensitive area enhancement, creation or restoration. Herbicide use in sensitive areas or their buffers is not allowed without written permission of the City. 3. Uses Requiring a Type II permit. a. Maintenance and repair of existing uses and facilities where alteration or additional fill materials will be placed or heavy construction equipment used. b. Construction of new essential streets and roads, rights -of -way and utilities. c. New surface water discharges to sensitive areas or their buffers from detention facilities, presettlement ponds or other surface water management structures may be allowed provided the discharge meets the clean water standards of RCW 90.48 and WAC 173.200 and 173.201 as amended, and does not adversely affect water level fluctuations in the wetland or adversely affect watercourse habitat and watercourse flow conditions relative to the existing rate. d. Plaza connectors. e. Essential public facilities. f. Overwater structures. W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 30 of 47 g. Recreation structures. 4. Conditional Uses. Dredging, where necessary to remediate contaminated sediments, if adverse impacts are mitigated, may be permitted. 5. Wetland Alterations. Alterations to wetlands are discouraged, are limited to the minimum necessary for project feasibility, and must have an approved mitigation plan developed in accordance with the standards in this chapter. a. Mitigation for wetlands shall follow the mitigation sequencing steps in this chapter and may include the following types of actions: 1) Creation the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics to develop a wetland on an upland or deepwater site, where a biological wetland did not previously exist; 2) Re- establishment the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of restoring wetland functions to a former wetland, resulting in a net increase in wetland acres and functions; 3) Rehabilitation the manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics with the goal of repairing historic functions and processes of a degraded wetland, resulting in a gain in wetland function but not acreage; 4) Enhancement the manipulation of the physical, chemical or biological characteristics to heighten, intensify, or improve specific functions (such as vegetation) or to change the growth stage or composition of the vegetation present, resulting in a change in wetland functions but not in a gain in wetland acreage; or 5) A combination of the three types. b. Allowed alterations per wetland type and mitigation ratios are as follows: 1) Alterations are not permitted to Category I or II wetlands unless specifically exempted under the provisions of this Program. Mitigation will still be required at a rate of 3.1 for creation or re- establishment, 4;1 for rehabilitation, and 6:1 for enhancement. 2) Alterations to Category III wetlands are prohibited except where the location or configuration of the wetland provides practical difficulties that can be resolved by modifying up to .10 (one tenth) of an acre of wetland. Mitigation for any alteration to a Category III wetland must be located contiguous to the altered wetland. Mitigation for any alteration to a Category III wetland must be provided at a ratio of 2:1 for creation or re- establishment, 4:1 for rehabilitation and 8:1 for enhancement alone. 3) Alterations to Category IV wetlands are allowed, where unavoidable and adequate mitigation is carried out in accordance with the standards of this section. Mitigation for alteration to a Category IV wetland will be 1.5:1 for creation or re- establishment and 3:1 for rehabilitation or enhancement. 4) Isolated wetlands formed on fill material in highly disturbed environmental conditions and assessed as having low overall wetland functions (scoring below 20 points) may be altered and /or relocated with the permission of the Director. These wetlands may include artificial hydrology or wetlands unintentionally created as the result of construction activities. The determination that a wetland is isolated is made by the US Army Corps of Engineers. 6. Watercourse Alterations. All impacts to a watercourse that degrade the functions and values of the watercourse shall be avoided. If alteration to the watercourse is unavoidable, all adverse impacts shall be mitigated in accordance with the approved mitigation plan as described in this chapter. Mitigation shall take place on -site or as close as possible to the impact location, and compensation shall be at a minimum 1.1 ratio. Any mitigation shall result in improved watercourse functions over existing conditions. a. Diverting or rerouting may only occur with the permission of the Director and an approved mitigation plan. Any watercourse that has critical wildlife habitat or is necessary for the life cycle or spawning of salmonids shall not be rerouted, unless it can be shown that the habitat will be improved for the benefit of the species. A watercourse may be rerouted or day lighted as a mitigation measure to improve watercourse function. b. Piping of any watercourse should be avoided. Relocation of a watercourse is preferred to piping; if piping occurs in a watercourse sensitive area, it shall be limited and shall require approval of the Director. Piping of Type 1 watercourses shall not be permitted. Piping may be allowed in Type 2, 3 or 4 watercourses if it is necessary for access purposes. Piping may be allowed in Type 4 watercourses if the watercourse has a degraded buffer, is located in a W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 31 of 47 143 144 highly developed area and does not provide shade, temperature control, etc. for habitat. The applicant must comply with the conditions of this section, including: providing excess capacity to meet needs of the system during a 100 -year flood event, and providing flow restrictors and complying with water quality and existing habitat enhancement procedures. c. No process that requires maintenance on a regular basis will be acceptable unless this maintenance process is part of the regular and normal facilities maintenance process or unless the applicant can show funding for this maintenance is ensured for as long as the use remains. standards: d. Piping projects shall be performed pursuant to the following applicable 1) The conveyance system shall be designed to comply with the standards in current use and recommended by the Department of Public Works. 2) Where allowed, piping shall be limited to the shortest length possible as determined by the Director to allow access onto a property. 3) Where water is piped for an access point, those driveways or entrances shall be consolidated to serve multiple properties where possible, and to minimize the length of piping. 4) When required by the Director, watercourses under drivable surfaces shall be contained in an arch culvert using oversize or super span culverts for rebuilding of a streambed. These shall be provided with check dams to reduce flows, and shall be replanted and enhanced according to a plan approved by the Director. 5) All watercourse crossing shall be designed to accommodate fish passage. Watercourse crossings shall not block fish passage where the streams are fish bearing. 6) Stormwater run -off shall be detained and infiltrated to preserve the watercourse channel's dominant discharge. 7) All construction shall be designed to have the least adverse impact on the watercourse, buffer and surrounding environment. 8) Piping shall be constructed during periods of low flow, or as allowed by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 9) Water quality must be as good or better for any water exiting the pipe as for the water entering the pipe, and flow must be comparable. 7. Fish and Wildlife Conservation Area Alterations. Alterations to the Green /Duwamish River are regulated by the shoreline provisions of this SMP. Alterations to Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas that have been created as restoration or habitat enhancement sites and are shown on the Sensitive Areas in the Shoreline Jurisdiction Map are prohibited and may only be authorized through a shoreline variance procedure. L. Sensitive Areas Mitigation. Mitigation shall be required for any proposals for dredging, filling, piping, diverting, relocation or other alterations of sensitive areas as allowed in this chapter and in accordance with mitigation sequencing and the established mitigation ratios. The mitigation plan shall be developed as part of a sensitive area study by a qualified specialist. 1. Mitigation Sequencing. Applicants shall demonstrate that reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to sensitive areas and buffers. When an alteration to a sensitive area or its required buffer is proposed, such alteration shall be avoided, minimized or compensated for in the following order of preference: a. Avoidance of sensitive area and buffer impacts, whether by finding another site or changing the location of the proposed activity on -site; b. Minimizing sensitive area and buffer impacts by limiting the degree of impact on site; c. Mitigation actions that require compensation by replacing, enhancing, or substitution. 2. Criteria for Approval of Alterations and Mitigation. Alterations and mitigation plans are subject to Director approval and may be approved only if the following findings are made: a. The alteration will not adversely affect water quality; b. The alteration will not adversely affect fish, wildlife, or their habitat; W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 32 of 47 c. The alteration will not have an adverse effect on drainage and /or stormwater detention capabilities; d. The alteration will not lead to unstable earth conditions or create an erosion hazard or contribute to scouring actions; e. The alteration will not be materially detrimental to any other property; f. The alteration will not have adverse effects on any other sensitive areas or the shoreline; and g. The mitigation will result in improved functions such as water quality, erosion control, and wildlife and fish habitat. 3. Mitigation Location. a. On -site mitigation shall be provided, except where it can be demonstrated that: 1) On -site mitigation is not scientifically feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, or other factors; or 2) Mitigation is not practical due to potentially adverse impacts from surrounding land uses; or 3) Existing functional values created at the site of the proposed restoration are significantly greater than lost sensitive area functions; or 4) Established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other sensitive area functions have been established and strongly justify location of mitigation at another site. b. Off -site mitigation shall occur within the Shoreline Jurisdiction in a location where the sensitive area functions can be restored. Buffer impacts must be mitigated at or as close as possible to the location of the impact. c. Wetland creation, relocation of a watercourse, or creation of a new fish and wildlife habitat shall not result in the new sensitive area or buffer extending beyond the development site and onto adjacent property without the agreement of the affected property owners, unless otherwise exempted by this SMP. 4. Mitigation Plan Content and Standards. The scope and content of a mitigation plan shall be decided on a case -by -case basis. As the impacts to the sensitive area increase, the mitigation measures to offset these impacts will increase in number and complexity. The minimum components of a complete mitigation plan are listed below. For wetland mitigation plans, the format should follow that established in "Wetland Mitigation in Washington State. Part 2 Developing Mitigation Plans (Washington Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers, EPA, March 2006, as amended)." a. Baseline information of quantitative data collection or a review and synthesis of existing data for both the project impact zone and the proposed mitigation site. b. Environmental goals and objectives that describe the purposes of the mitigation measures. This should include a description of site selection criteria, identification of target evaluation species, and resource functions. c. Performance standards for the specific criteria for fulfilling environmental goals and for beginning remedial action or contingency measures. They may include water quality standards, species richness and diversity targets, habitat diversity indices, or other ecological, geological or hydrological criteria. The following shall be considered the minimum performance standards for approved sensitive area alterations: 1) Sensitive area functions and improved habitat for fish and wildlife are improved over those of the original conditions. 2) Hydrologic conditions, hydroperiods and watercourse channels are improved over existing conditions and the specific performance standards specified in the approved mitigation plan are achieved. 3) Acreage requirements for enhancement or creation are met. 4) Vegetation native to the Pacific Northwest is installed and vegetation survival and coverage standards over time are met and maintained. 5) Buffer and bank conditions and functions exceed the original state. W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 33 of 47 145 146 6) Stream channel habitat and dimensions are maintained or improved such that the fisheries habitat functions of the compensatory stream reach, meet or exceed that of the original stream. d. A detailed construction plan of the written specifications and descriptions of mitigation techniques. This plan should include the proposed construction sequence and construction management, and be accompanied by detailed site diagrams and blueprints that are an integral requirement of any development proposal. e. Monitoring and /or evaluation program that outlines the approach and frequency for assessing progress of the completed project. An outline shall be included that spells out how the monitoring data will be evaluated and reported. f. Maintenance plan that outlines the activities and frequency of maintenance to ensure compliance with performance standards. g. Contingency plan identifying potential courses of action and any corrective measures to be taken when monitoring or evaluation indicates project performance standards have not been met. h. Performance security or other assurance devices. 5. Mitigation Timing. a. Mitigation projects shall be completed prior to activities that will permanently disturb sensitive areas or their buffers and either prior to or immediately after activities that will temporarily disturb sensitive areas. b. Construction of mitigation projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing wildlife, flora and water quality, and shall be completed prior to use or occupancy of the activity or development. The Director may allow activities that permanently disturb wetlands or watercourses prior to implementation of the mitigation plan under the following circumstances: conditions; phasing. 1) To allow planting or re- vegetation to occur during optimal weather 2) To avoid disturbance during critical wildlife periods; or 3) To account for unique site constraints that dictate construction timing or c. Monitoring of buffer alterations shall be required for three to five years. All other alterations shall be monitored for a minimum of five years. 6. Corrective Actions and Monitoring. The Director shall require subsequent corrective actions and long -term monitoring of the project if adverse impacts to regulated sensitive areas or their buffers are identified. 7. Recording. The property owner receiving approval of a use or development pursuant to the SMP shall record the City- approved site plan clearly delineating the sensitive area and its buffer with the King County Division of Records and Elections. The face of the site plan must include a statement that the provisions of this chapter, as of the effective date of the ordinance from which the SMP derives or is thereafter amended, control use and development of the subject property and provide for any responsibility of the latent defects or deficiencies. 8. Assurance Device. a. The Director may require a letter of credit or other security device acceptable to the City to guarantee performance and maintenance requirements. All assurances shall be on a form approved by the City Attorney. b. When alteration of a sensitive area is approved, the Director may require an assurance device, on a form approved by the City Attorney, to cover the monitoring costs and correction of possible deficiencies for the term of the approved monitoring and maintenance program. c. The assurance device shall be released by the Director upon receipt of written confirmation submitted to the Department from the applicant's qualified professional that the mitigation or restoration has met its performance standards and is successfully established. Should the mitigation or restoration meet performance standards and be successfully established in the third or fourth year of monitoring, the City may release the assurance device early The assurance device may be held for a longer period, if at the end of the monitoring W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 34 of 47 period if, the performance standards have not been met or the mitigation has not been successfully established. d. Release of the security does not absolve the property owner of responsibility for maintenance or correcting latent defects or deficiencies or other duties under law. Section 10. Public Access to the Shoreline Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.100 Public Access to the Shoreline A. Applicability. 1. Public access shall be provided on all property that abuts the Green Duwamish River shoreline in accordance with this section as further discussed below where any of the following conditions are present: a. Where a development or use will create increased demand for public access to the shoreline, the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. For the purposes of this section, an "increase in demand for public access" is determined by evaluating whether the development reflects an increase in the land use intensity (for example converting a warehouse to office or retail use), or a significant increase in the square footage of an existing building A significant increase is defined as an increase of 3,000 square feet. b. Where a development or use will interfere with an existing public access way, the development or use shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. Impacts to public access may include blocking access or discouraging use of existing on -site or nearby accesses. c. Where a use or development will interfere with a public use of lands or waters subject to the public trust doctrine, the development shall provide public access to mitigate this impact. d. Where the development is proposed by a public entity or on public lands. e. Where identified on the Shoreline Public Access Map. 2. For the purposes of this section, an "increase in demand for public access" is determined by evaluating whether the development reflects an increase in the land use intensity, for example converting a warehouse to office or retail use, or a significant increase in the square footage of an existing building. A significant increase is defined as an increase of 3,000 square feet. The extent of public access required will be proportional to the amount of increase in the demand for public access. For smaller projects, the Director will review the intent of this section and the scope of the project to determine a reasonable amount of public access to be carried out. Depending on the amount of increase, the project may utilize the alternative provisions for meeting public access in 18.44.100(F). The terms and conditions of 18.44.100(A) and (B) shall be deemed satisfied if the applicant and the City agree upon a master trail plan providing for public paths and trails within a parcel or group of parcels. 3. The provisions of this section do not apply to the following: a. Short plats of four or fewer lots; b. Where providing such access would cause unavoidable health or safety hazards; c. Where providing such access would create inherent and unavoidable security problems; or d. Where providing such access would cause significant ecological impacts that cannot be mitigated. An applicant claiming an exemption under items 2(b) -(d) above must comply with the procedures in TMC Section 18.44.100(F). B. General Standards. 1. To improve public access to the Green /Duwamish River, sites shall be designed to provide: a. Safe, visible and accessible pedestrian and non motorized vehicle connections between proposed development and the river's edge, particularly when the site is adjacent to the Green River Trail or other approved trail system, and b. Public pathway entrances that are clearly visible from the street edge; and W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 35 of 47 147 148 c. Clearly identified pathways that are separate from vehicular circulation areas. This may be accomplished through the use of special paving materials such as precast pavers, bomonite, changes in color or distinct and detailed scoring patterns and textures. d. Site elements that are organized to clearly distinguish between public and private access and circulation systems. 2. Required public access shall be fully developed and available for public use at the time of occupancy in accordance with development permit conditions except where the decision maker determines an appropriate mechanism for delayed public access implementation is necessary for practical reasons. Where appropriate, a bond or cash assignment may be approved, on review and approval by the Director of Community Development, to extend this requirement for 90 days from the date the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 3. Public access easements and related permit conditions shall be recorded on the deed of title or the face of the plat, short plat or approved site plan as a condition tied to the use of the land. Recording with the County shall occur prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit or final plat approval. Upon re- development of such a site, the easement may be relocated to facilitate the continued public access to the shoreline. 4. Approved signs indicating the public's right of access and hours of access, if restricted, shall be constructed, installed and maintained by the applicant in conspicuous locations at public access sites. Signs should be designed to distinguish between public and private areas. Signs controlling or restricting public access may be approved as a condition of permit approval. 5. Required access must be maintained throughout the life of the project. 6. Public access features shall be separated from residential uses through the use of setbacks, low walls, berms, landscaping, or other device of a scale and materials appropriate to the site. 7. Shared public access between developments is encouraged. Where access is to be shared between adjacent developments, the minimum width for the individual access easement may be reduced, provided the total width of easements contributed by each adjacent development equals a width that complies with Fire Department requirements and /or exceeds the minimum for an individual access. 8. Public access sites shall be connected directly to the nearest public area (e.g., street, public park, or adjoining public access easement). Where connections are not currently possible, the site shall be designed to accommodate logical future connections. C. Requirements for Shoreline Trails. Where public access is required under TMC Section 18.44.100(A)1 above, the requirement will be met by provision of a shoreline trail as follows: 1. Development on Properties Abutting Existing Green River Trail. An applicant seeking to develop property abutting the existing trail shall meet public access requirements by upgrading the trail along the property frontage to meet the standards of a 14- foot -wide trail with 2 -foot shoulders on each side. 2. Development on Properties Where New Trails are Planned. An applicant seeking to develop property abutting the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments shall meet public access requirements by dedicating an 18- foot -wide trail easement to the City for public access along the river. D Publicly -Owned Shorelines. 1. Shoreline development by any public entities, including but not limited to the City of Tukwila, King County, port districts, state agencies, or public utility districts, shall include public access measures as part of each development project, unless such access is shown to be incompatible due to reasons of safety, security, impact to the shoreline environment or other provisions listed in this section. 2. The following requirements apply to street ends and City-owned property adjacent to the river a. Public right -of -way and "road- ends," or portions thereof, shall not be vacated and shall be maintained for future public access. W.\ Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 36 of 47 b. Unimproved right -of -ways and portions of right -of -ways, such as street ends and turn-outs, shall be dedicated to public access uses until such time as the portion becomes improved right -of -way. Uses shall be limited to passive outdoor recreation, car top boat launching, fishing, interpretive /educational uses, and /or parking, which accommodates these uses, and shall be designed so as to not interfere with the privacy of adjacent residential uses. c. City-owned facilities within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall provide new trails and trail connections to the Green River Trail in accordance with approved plans and this SMP. d. All City-owned recreational facilities within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, unless qualifying for an exemption as specified in this chapter, shall make adequate provisions for: 1) Non motorized and pedestrian access; 2) The prevention of trespass onto adjacent properties through landscaping, fencing or other appropriate measures; 3) Signage indicating the public right -of -way to shoreline areas; and 4) Mechanisms to prevent environmental degradation of the shoreline from public use. E. Public Access Incentives. 1. The minimum yard setback for buildings, uses, utilities or development from non- riverfront lot lines may be reduced as follows: a. Where a development provides a public access corridor between off -site areas, or public shoreline areas to public shoreline areas, one side yard may be reduced to a zero lot line placement; or b. Where a development provides additional public access area(s) equal in area to at least 2.5% of total building area, the front yard (the landward side of the development) may be reduced by 50 2. The maximum height for structures may be increased by 15% when: a. Development devotes at least 5% of its building or land area to public shoreline access; or b. Development devotes at least 10% of its land area to employee shoreline access. 3. The maximum height for structures under 18.44.070(C)3 and this section may be increased by a maximum of 25% when: a. One of the criteria in 18.44.100(E)2 is met; and b. The applicant restores or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including, but not limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property to offset the impact of the increase in height. Buffer restoration /enhancement projects undertaken to meet the requirements of TMC Section 18.44.100(F) do not qualify as restoration or enhancement for purposes of the height incentive provided in this subsection. c. No combination of incentives may be used to gain more than a 25% total height increase for a structure. 4. The maximum height for structures may be increased to the height permitted in the underlying zoning district for properties that construct a 14 -foot -wide paved trail with a 2- foot -wide shoulder on each side for public access along the river in areas identified for new shoreline trail segments, or where, in the case of properties containing or abutting existing public access trails, the existing trail either meets the standard of a 14- foot -wide trail with 2- foot -wide shoulders on either side or the property owner provides any necessary easements and improvements to upgrade the existing trail to that standard along the property frontage. F. Exemptions from Provision of On -Site Public Access. 1. Requirements for providing on -site general public access, as distinguished from employee access, will not apply if the applicant can demonstrate one or more of the following: a. Unavoidable health or safety hazards to the public exist related to the primary use that cannot be prevented by any practical means. b. Inherent security requirements of the use cannot be satisfied through the application of alternative design features or other solutions. W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 37 of 47 149 150 c. The cost of providing the access, easement or other public amenity on or off the development site is unreasonably disproportionate to the total long -term cost of the proposed development. d, Unavoidable environmental harm or net loss of shoreline ecological functions that cannot be adequately mitigated will result from the public access. e. Access is not feasible due to the configuration of existing parcels and structures, such that access areas are blocked in a way that cannot be remedied reasonably by the proposed development. f. Significant undue and unavoidable conflict between the proposed access and adjacent uses would occur and cannot be mitigated. g. Space is needed for water- dependent uses or navigation. 2. In order to meet any of the above referenced conditions, the applicant must first demonstrate, and the City determine in its findings through a Type II decision, that all reasonable alternatives have been exhausted including, but not limited to: a. Regulating access by such means as maintaining a gate and /or limiting hours of use; b. Designing separation of uses and activities through fencing, terracing, hedges or other design features; or c. Providing access on a site geographically separate from the proposal such as a street end cannot be accomplished. 3. If the above conditions are demonstrated, and the proposed development is not subject to the Parks Impact Fee, alternative provisions for meeting public access are required and include: a. Development of public access at an adjacent street end; or b. Protection through easement or setbacks of landmarks, unique natural features or other areas valuable for their interpretive potential; or c. Contribution of materials and /or labor toward projects identified in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, the Shoreline Restoration Plan, or other City adopted plan, or d. In lieu of providing public access under this section, at the Director's discretion, the applicant may provide restoration /enhancement of the shoreline jurisdiction to a scale commensurate with the foregone public access. Section 11. Shoreline Design Guidelines Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.110 Shoreline Design Guidelines The Green /Duwamish River is an amenity that should be valued and celebrated when designing projects that will be located along its length. If arty portion of a project falls within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, the entire project will be reviewed under these guidelines as well as the relevant sections of the Design Review Chapter of the Zoning Code (TMC Chapter 18.60). The standards of TMC Chapter 18.60 shall guide the type of review, whether administrative or by the Board of Architectural Review. A. The following standards apply to development, uses and activities in the Urban Conservancy and High Intensity Environments and non residential development in the Shoreline Residential Environment: 1. Relationship of Structure to Site. Development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: a. Respect and reflect the shape of the shoreline. b. Orient building elements to site such that public river access, both visual and physical, is enhanced. c. Orient buildings to allow for casual observation of pedestrian and trail activity from interior spaces. d. Site and orient buildings to provide maximum views from building interiors toward the river and the shoreline. e. Orient public use areas and private amenities to the river. W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 38 of 47 f. Clearly allocate spaces, accommodating parking, vehicular circulation and buildings, to preserve existing stands of vegetation or trees so that natural areas can be set aside, improved, or integrated into site organization and planning. g. Clearly define and separate public from non -public spaces with the use of paving, signage, and landscaping. 2. Building Design. Development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: a. To prevent building mass and shape from overwhelming the desired human scale along the river, development shall avoid blank walls on the public and river sides of buildings. b. Buildings should be designed to follow the curve of the river and respond to changes in topography; buildings must not "turn their back" to the river. c. Design common areas in buildings to take advantage of shoreline views and access; incorporate outdoor seating areas that are compatible with shoreline access. d. Consider the height and scale of each building in relation to the site. e. Extend site features such as plazas that allow pedestrian access and enjoyment of the river to the landward side of the buffer's edge. f. Locate lunchrooms and other common areas to open out onto the water -ward side of the site to maximize enjoyment of the river. g. Design structures to take advantage of the river frontage location by incorporating features such as: 1) plazas and landscaped open space that connect with a shoreline trail system, 2) windows that offer views of the river; or 3) pedestrian entrances that face the river. h. View obscuring fencing is permitted only when necessary for documentable use requirements and must be designed with landscaping per the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Other fencing, when allowed, must be designed to complement the proposed and /or existing development materials and design. i. Where there are public trails, locate any fencing between the site and the landward side of the shoreline trail. 3. Design of Public Access. Development within the Shoreline Jurisdiction shall demonstrate compliance with the following: a. Public access shall be barrier free, where feasible, and designed consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act. b. Public access landscape design shall use native vegetation, in accordance with the standards in the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section. Additional landscape features may be required where desirable to provide public /private space separation and screening of utility, service and parking areas. c. Furniture used in public access areas shall be appropriate for the proposed level of development and the character of the surrounding area. For example, large urban projects should provide formal benches; for smaller projects in less developed areas, simpler, less formal benches or suitable alternatives are appropriate. d. Materials used in public access furniture, structures or sites shall be: 1) Durable and capable of withstanding exposure to the elements; 2) Environmentally friendly and take advantage of technology in building materials, lighting, paved surfaces, porous pavement, etc, wherever practical; and 3) Consistent with the character of the shoreline and the anticipated use. e. Public- Private Separation: 1) Public access facilities shall look and feel welcoming to the public, and not appear as an intrusion into private property. 2) Natural elements such as logs, grass, shrubs, and elevation separations are encouraged as means to define the separation between public and private space. W Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 39 of 47 151 152 Section 12. Shoreline Restoration Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.120 Shoreline Restoration A. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Not Required. Shoreline restoration projects shall be allowed without a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit when these projects meet the criteria established by WAC 173- 27- 040(o) and (p) and HB 2199. B. Changes in Shoreline Jurisdiction Due to Restoration. 1. In cases where shoreline restoration projects result in a change in the location of the OHWM and associated Shoreline Jurisdiction on the subject property and /or adjacent properties, and where application of this chapter regulations would preclude or interfere with the uses permitted by the underlying zoning thus presenting a hardship to the project proponent. a. Applications for relief, as specified below, must meet the following criteria: 1) The proposed relief is the minimum necessary to relieve the hardship; 2) After granting the proposed relief, there is net environmental benefit from the restoration project; and 3) Granting the proposed relief is consistent with the objectives of the shoreline restoration project and with the Shoreline Master Program. 4) Where a shoreline restoration project is created as mitigation to obtain a development permit, the project proponent required to perform the mitigation is not eligible for relief under the provisions of this section. b. The portion of property that moves from outside Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project: 1) may be developed for the full range of uses of the underlying zoning consistent with the Zoning Code, including uses that are not water- oriented; 2) is not required to obtain a shoreline substantial development permit; 3) is not subject to provisions for public access; 4) is not subject to shoreline design review; and 5) is not subject to the development standards set forth in this chapter. c. The intent of the exemptions identified above in a(1) to a(4) is to implement the restoration projects of the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan, which reflects the projects identified in the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 9 Plan pursuant to Policy 5.2 of the SMP. 2. Consistent with the provisions of (1)(a) and (1)(b) above, the Shoreline Residential Environment Buffer, High Intensity or Urban Conservancy Environment Buffer width may be reduced to no less than 25 feet measured from the new location of the OHWM for the portion of the property that moves from outside the Shoreline Jurisdiction to inside Shoreline Jurisdiction as a result of the shoreline restoration project, subject to the following standards: a. The 25 -foot buffer area must be vegetated according to the requirements of the Vegetation Protection and Landscaping Section or as otherwise approved by the City; and b. The proponents of the restoration project are responsible for the installation and maintenance of the vegetation. 3. The habitat restoration project proponents must record with King County a survey that identifies the location of the OHWM location prior to implementation of the shoreline restoration project, any structures that fall within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, and the new location of the OHWM once construction of the shoreline restoration project is completed. 4. Shoreline restoration projects must obtain all U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife approvals as well as written approval from the City. Section 13. Administration Requirements Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.130 Administration A. Applicability of Shoreline Master Program and Substantial Development Permit. W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 40 of 47 1. Development in the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Based on guidelines in the SMA for a Minimum Shoreline Jurisdiction, Tukwila's Shoreline Jurisdiction is defined as follows: The Tukwila Shoreline Jurisdiction includes the channel of the Green /Duwamish River, its banks, the upland area which extends from the OHWM landward for 200 feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its floodplain. The floodway shall not include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity. 2. Applicability. The Tukwila SMP applies to uses, change of uses, activities or development that occurs within the above defined Shoreline Jurisdiction. All proposed uses and development occurring within the Shoreline Jurisdiction must conform to Chapter 90.58 RCW, the SMA, and this chapter whether or not a permit is required. B. Substantial Development Permit Requirements. 1. Permit Application Procedures. Applicants for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit shall comply with permit application procedures in TMC Chapter 18.104. 2. Exemptions. a. To qualify for an exemption, the proposed use, activity or development must meet the requirements for an exemption as described in WAC 173 -27 -040, except for properties that meet the requirements of the Shoreline Restoration Section, TMC Section 18.44.120. The purpose of a shoreline exemption is to provide a process for uses and activities which do not trigger the need for a Substantial Development Permit, but require compliance with all provisions of the City's SMP and overlay district. b. The Director may impose conditions to the approval of exempted developments and /or uses as necessary to assure compliance of the project with the SMA and the Tukwila SMP, per WAC 173- 27- 040(e). For example, in the case of development subject to a building permit but exempt from the shoreline permit process, the Building Official or other permit authorizing official, through consultation with the Director, may attach shoreline management terms and conditions to building permits and other permit approvals pursuant to RCW 90.58.140. C. Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. 1. Purpose. As stated in WAC 173 -27 -160, the purpose of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is to allow greater flexibility in the application of use regulations of this chapter in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by the City or the Department of Ecology to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and /or assure consistency of the project with the SMA and the City's SMP. Uses which are specifically prohibited by the SMP may not be authorized with approval of a CUP. 2. Application. Shoreline Conditional Use Permits are a Type 4 permit processed under TMC Chapter 18.104. 3. Application Requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for permit application and approvals indicated in TMC Chapter 18.104 and this chapter. 4. Approval Criteria. a. Uses classified as shoreline conditional uses may be authorized, provided that the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: 1) The proposed use will be consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the policies of the Tukwila SMP; 2) The proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines; 3) The proposed use of the site and design of the project will be compatible with other permitted uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the Comprehensive Plan and this chapter; 4) The proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located, and 5) The public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. b. In the granting of all Conditional Use Permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if Conditional Use Permits were granted to other developments in the area where similar W\ Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 41 of 47 153 154 circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58 and all local ordinances and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. D. Shoreline Variance Permits. 1. Purpose. The purpose of a Shoreline Variance Permit is strictly limited to granting relief from specific bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in this chapter where there are extraordinary or unique circumstances relating to the physical character or configuration of property such that the strict implementation of this chapter will impose unnecessary hardships on the applicant or thwart the SMA policies as stated in RCW 90.58.020. Reasonable use requests that are located in the shoreline must be processed as a variance until such time as the SMA is amended to establish a process for reasonable uses. 2. Application Requirements. Applicants must meet all requirements for a Type 3 permit application and approvals indicated in TMC Chapter 18.104. 3. Shoreline Variance Permits should be granted in circumstances where denial of the permit would result in a thwarting of the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. In all instances the applicant must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances exist and the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. 4. Approval Criteria. A Shoreline Variance Permit for a use, activity or development that will be located landward of the OHWM and /or landward of any wetland may be authorized provided the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: a. The strict application of the bulk, dimensional, or performance standards set forth in this chapter preclude or significantly interfere with a reasonable use of the property not otherwise prohibited by this chapter. b. The hardship described in TMC Section 18.44.130.D(4)a is specifically related to the property and is the result of unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of this chapter, and not from the owner's own actions or deed restrictions; and the variance is necessary because of these conditions in order to provide the owner with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. c. The design of the project will be compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the Comprehensive Plan and SMP and will not cause adverse impacts to adjacent properties or the shoreline environment. d. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by other properties in the area. e. The variance is the minimum necessary to afford relief. f. The public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. 5. Shoreline Variance Permits Waterward of OHWM. a. Shoreline Variance Permits for development and /or uses that will be located either waterward of the OHWM or within any sensitive area may be authorized only if the applicant can demonstrate all of the following: 1) The strict application of the bulk, dimensional or performance standards set forth in this chapter preclude all reasonable permitted use of the property. 2) The proposal is consistent with the criteria established under TMC Section 18.44.130.D(4), "Approval Criteria." 3) The public rights of navigation and use of the shorelines will not be adversely affected by the granting of the variance. b. In the granting of all variance permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area such that the total of the variances would remain consistent with RCW 90.58.020 and not cause substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. c. Variances from the use regulations of this chapter are prohibited. E. Non Conforming Development. 1. Non Conforming Uses. Any non conforming lawful use of land that would not be allowed under the terms of this chapter may be continued as an allowed, legal, non conforming W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 42 of 47 use, defined in TMC Chapter 18.06 or as hereafter amended, so long as that use remains lawful, subject to the following: a. No such non conforming use shall be enlarged, intensified, increased or extended to occupy a greater use of the land, structure or combination of the two, than was occupied at the effective date of adoption of this chapter unless TMC Section 18.66.120 applies. b. No non conforming use shall be moved or extended in whole or in part to any other portion of the lot or parcel occupied by such use on the effective date of adoption of this chapter. c. If any such non conforming use ceases for any reason for a period of more than 24 consecutive months, any subsequent use shall conform to the regulations specified by in this chapter for the shoreline environment in which such use is located. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria set forth in TMC Section 18.44.130(E)4. d. If a change of use is proposed to a use determined to be non conforming by application of provisions in this chapter, the proposed new use must be a permitted use in this chapter or a use approved under a Type 2 permit with public notice process. For purposes of implementing this section, a change of use constitutes a change from one permitted or conditional use category to another such use category as listed within the Zoning Code. e. A structure that is being or has been used for a non conforming use may be used for a different non conforming use only upon the approval of a Type 2 permit subject to public notice. Before approving a change in non conforming use, the following findings must be made: 1) No reasonable alternative conforming use is practical, 2) The proposed use will be at least as consistent with the policies and provisions of the SMP and as compatible with the uses in the area as the non conforming use; 3) the use or activity is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional purpose; 4) The structure(s) associated with the non conforming use shall not be expanded in a manner that increases the extent of the non conformity; 5) The change in use will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and /or processes; 6) The applicant restores and /or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including but not limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property, to offset the impact of the change of use per the vegetation management standards of this chapter. This may include the restoration of paved areas to vegetated area if no longer in use; 7) The use complies with the Type 2 permit process of TMC Chapter 18.104; and 8) The preference is to reduce exterior uses in the buffer to the maximum extent possible. 2. Non Conforming Structures. Where a lawful structure exists on the effective date of adoption of this chapter that could not be built under the terms of this chapter by reason of restrictions on height, buffers or other characteristics of the structure, it may be continued as an allowed, legal structure so long as the structure remains otherwise lawful subject to the following provisions: a. No such structure may be enlarged or altered in such a way that increases its degree of nonconformity or increases its impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline environment unless TMC Section 18.66.120 applies. Ordinary maintenance and repair of and upgrades to a non conforming structure are permitted, including but not limited to, painting, roof repair and replacement, plumbing, wiring, mechanical equipment repair /replacement, repaving and weatherization. These and other alterations, additions or enlargements may be allowed as long as the work done does not extend further into any required buffer, increase the amount of impervious surface, or increase the impacts to the functions and values of the shoreline environment. Complete plans shall be required of all work contemplated under this section. b. Should such structure be destroyed by any accidental means, the structure may be reconstructed to its original dimensions and location on the lot provided application is made W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 43 of 47 155 156 b. Should such structure be destroyed by any accidental means, the structure may be reconstructed to its original dimensions and location on the lot provided application is made for permits within 12 months of the date the damage occurred and all reconstruction is completed within two years of permit issuance. In the event the property is redeveloped, such re- development must be in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. c. Should such structure be moved for any reason or any distance whatsoever, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations of this chapter after it is moved. d. When a non conforming structure, or structure and premises in combination, is vacated or abandoned for 24 consecutive months, the structure, or structure and premises in combination, shall thereafter be required to be in conformance with the regulations of this chapter. Upon request of the owner, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months and upon reasonable cause shown, the City Council may grant an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months using the criteria in TMC Section 18.44.130(E)4. e. Residential structures and uses located in any single- family or multiple family residential zoning district and in existence at the time of adoption of this chapter shall not be deemed nonconforming in terms of height, use, or location provisions of this title. Such buildings may be rebuilt after a fire or other natural disaster to their original dimensions, location and height, but may not be changed except as provided in the non conforming uses section of this chapter. f. Single family structures in single- or multiple family residential zoning districts, which have legally non conforming setbacks from the OHWM per the SMP buffer, shall be allowed to expand the ground floor only along the existing building line(s) as long as the existing distance from the nearest point of the structure to the OHWM is not reduced and the square footage of new intrusion into the buffer does not exceed 50% of the square footage of the current intrusion. As a condition of building permit approval, a landscape plan showing removal of invasive plant species within the entire shoreline buffer and replanting with appropriate native species must be submitted to the City. Plantings should be maintained through the establishment period. g. Within the Shoreline Jurisdiction, existing structures that do not meet the requirements of the SMP may be altered, or nartiallv reconstructed or rcplaccd, provided that: 1) The new construction is within the original dimensions and location on the lo t; 2) The new construction does not further intrude into or adversely impact the required buffer; 3) The use or activity within the structure is enlarged, intensified, increased or altered only to the minimum amount necessary to achieve the intended functional purpose; 4) The reconstruction will not create adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions and /or processes; 5) For properties in non leveed portions of the river, the applicant re- slopes the bank to a 2.5:1 or 3:1 angle as applicable depending on the property's shoreline environment designation and restores and /or enhances the entire shoreline buffer, including but not limited to, paved areas no longer in use on the property. Where an existing building would prevent the re- sloping of the bank to 2.5:1 or 3:1 as applicable, the applicant must re -slope to the extent possible, remove invasive vegetation and re- vegetate according to the provisions of this chapter. For properties behind levees that do not meet the minimum profile, restore and /or enhance the remaining buffer area and remove invasive vegetation and plant with native vegetation on the levee prism as permitted by the COE; and 6) The property owner applies for and is granted approval of a Type 2 permit. h. A non conforming use, within a non conforming structure, shall not be allowed to expand into any other portion of the structure. 3. For the purposes of this section, altered ties or partially reconstructed is defined as work that does not exceeds 50% of the assessed valuation of the building over a three -year period. 4. Requests for Time Extension Non conforming Uses and Structures a. A property owner may request, prior to the end of the 24 consecutive months, an extension of time beyond the 24 consecutive months. Such a request shall be considered as a Conditional Use Type-2 permit under TMC Chapter 18.64104 and may be approved only when: W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44_12- 7_REV.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 44 of 47 2) For a non- conforming structure, special economic circumstances prevent the lease or sale of said structure within 24 months; and 3) The applicant restores and /or enhances the shoreline buffer on the property to offset the impact of the continuation of the non conforming use. For non- conforming uses, the amount of buffer to be restored and /or enhanced will be determined based on the percentage of the existing building used by the non conforming use for which a time extension is being requested. Depending on the size of the area to be restored and /or enhanced, the Director may require targeted plantings rather than a linear planting arrangement. The vegetation management standards of this program shall be used for guidance on any restoration /enhancement. For non conforming structures, for each six-month extension of time requested, 15% of the available buffer must be restored /enhanced. b. Conditions may be attached to the permit that are deemed necessary to assure compliance with the above findings, the requirements of the Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act and to assure that the use will not become a nuisance or a hazard. 5. Building Safety. Nothing in this SMP shall be deemed to prevent the strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of any non conforming building or part thereof declared to be unsafe by order of any City official charged with protecting the public safety. a. Alterations or expansion of a non conforming structure that are required by law or a public agency in order to comply with public health or safety regulations are the only alterations or expansions allowed. b. Alterations or expansions permitted under this section shall be the minimum necessary to meet the public safety concerns. 6. Non Conforming Parking Lots. a. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to require a change in any aspect of a structure or facility covered thereunder including, without limitation, parking lot layout, loading space requirements and curb -cuts, for any structure or facility which existed on the date of adoption of this chapter b. If a change of use takes place or an addition is proposed, that requires an increase in the parking area by an increment less than 100 the requirements of this chapter shall be complied with for the additional parking area. c. If a change of use takes place or an addition is proposed, that requires an increase in the parking area by an increment greater than 100 the requirements of this chapter shall be complied with for the entire parking area. 7. Non Conforming Landscape Areas. a. Adoption of the vegetation protection and landscaping regulations contained in this chapter shall not be construed to require a change in the landscape improvements for any legal landscape area that existed on the date of adoption of this chapter, unless and until the property is redeveloped or alteration of the existing structure is made beyond the thresholds provided herein. b. At such time as the property is redeveloped or the existing structure is altered beyond the thresholds provided herein and the associated premises does not comply with the vegetation protection and landscaping requirements of this chapter, a landscape plan that conforms to the requirements of this chapter shall be submitted to the Director for approval. Section 14. Appeals Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.140 Appeals Any appeal of a decision by the City on a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use or Shoreline Variance must be appealed to the Washington State Shorelines Hearing Board. Section 15. Enforcement and Penalties Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: TMC 18.44.150 Enforcement and Penalties A. Violations. The following actions shall be considered violations of this chapter: W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 45 of 47 157 158 1. To use, construct or demolish any structure, or to conduct clearing, earth moving, construction or other development not authorized under a Substantial Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit or Variance Permit, where such permit is required by this chapter. 2. Any work that is not conducted in accordance with the plans, conditions, or other requirements in a permit approved pursuant to this chapter, provided the terms or conditions are stated in the permit or the approved plans. 3. To remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in accordance with this chapter. 4. To misrepresent any material fact in any application, plans or other information submitted to obtain any shoreline use or development authorization. 5. To fail to comply with the requirements of this chapter. B. Enforcement. It shall be the duty of the Director to enforce this chapter subject to the terms and conditions of TMC Chapter 8.45. C. Inspection Access. 1. For the purpose of inspection for compliance with the provisions of a permit or this chapter, authorized representatives of the Director may enter all sites for which a permit has been issued. 2. Upon completion of all requirements of a permit, the applicant shall request a final inspection by contacting the planner of record. The permit process is complete upon final approval by the planner. D. Penalties. 1. Any violation of any provision of the SMP, or failure to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter, shall be subject to the penalties prescribed in TMC Chapter 8.45, "Enforcement" and shall be unposed pursuant to the procedures and conditions set forth in that chapter. 2. Penalties assessed for violations of the SMP shall be determined by TMC Section 8.45.100, "Penalties." 3. It shall not be a defense to the prosecution for failure to obtain a permit required by this chapter that a contractor, subcontractor, person with responsibility on the site, or person authorizing or directing the work erroneously believed a permit had been issued to the property owner or any other person. E. Remedial Measures Required. In addition to penalties provided in TMC Chapter 8.45, the Director may require any person conducting work in violation of this chapter to mitigate the impacts of unauthorized work by carrying out remedial measures. 1. Remedial measures must conform to the policies and guidelines of this chapter and the SMA. 2. The cost of any remedial measures necessary to correct violation(s) of this chapter shall be borne by the property owner and /or applicant. F Injunctive Relief. 1. Whenever the City has reasonable cause to believe that any person is violating or threatening to violate this chapter or any rule or other provisions adopted or issued pursuant to this chapter, it may, either before or after the institution of any other action or proceeding authorized by this ordinance, institute a civil action in the name of the City for injunctive relief to restrain the violation or threatened violation. Such action shall be brought in King County Superior Court. 2. The institution of an act for injunctive relief under this section shall not relieve any party to such proceedings from any civil or criminal penalty prescribed for violations of this chapter. G. Abatement. Any use, structure, development or work that occurs in violation of this chapter or in violation of any lawful order or requirement of the Director pursuant to this section, shall be deemed to be a public nuisance and may be abated in the manner provided by TMC Section 8.45.105. Section 16. Liability Adopted. Updated requirements for shoreline regulations are hereby adopted to read as follows: W:\ Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Tide 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Page 46 of 47 18.44.170 Liability A. Liability for any adverse impacts or damages resulting from work performed in accordance with a permit issued on behalf of the City within the City limits shall be the sole responsibility of the owner of the site for which the permit was issued. B. No provision of or term used in this chapter is intended to impose any duty upon the City or any of its officers or employees that would subject them to damages in a civil action. Section 17. Applicability of Amended Zoning Code. After the effective date of this ordinance, Chapter 18.44 of the Zoning Code, as hereby amended shall apply to all properties subject to the shoreline overlay, provided that nothing contained herein shall be deemed to override any vested rights or require any alteration of a non conforming use or non conforming structure, except as specifically provided in Chapter 18.44 of the Zoning Code, as amended. Section 18. Repealer. Ordinance Nos. 1796 §3 (part), 1775 §2 (part), and 1758 §1 (part), as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.44, are hereby repealed. Section 19. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 20. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force upon approval of the Shoreline Master Program by the Washington State Department of Ecology and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009. ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM 13Y: Office of the City Attorney W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Title 18.44.doc CL:ksn 12/09/2009 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published. Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Page 47 of 47 159 160 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, UPDATING DEFINITIONS FOR SHORELINE REGULATIONS TO INCORPORATE NEW STATE REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1758 §1 (PART); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in 1995 to implement the goals and policies of the Growth Management Act of 1990 and the King County County-wide Planning Policies; and WHEREAS, the Green /Duwamish River, a shoreline of the State regulated pursuant to RCW 90.58, runs through the entire length of the City of Tukwila; and WHEREAS, due to the presence of the Green River in the City, the 1995 Comprehensive Plan included policies addressing shorelines; and WHEREAS, as set forth in RCW 90.58.020, the Washington State Legislature has found that shorelines of the State are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and unrestricted construction on privately and publicly -owned shorelines of the State is not in the best public interest; and WHEREAS, in RCW 90.58.020 the Legislature directed local governments developing Shoreline Master Programs for shorelines of State -wide significance to give preference to the following uses, in order of preference, which: 1) recognize and protect the State -wide interest over local interest; 2) preserve the natural character of the shoreline; 3) result in long -term over short -term benefit; 4) protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline; 5) increase public access to publicly -owned areas of the shorelines; 6) increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline; and 7) provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary; and WHEREAS, in 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) adopted new rules pursuant to RCW 90.58.200 to carry out provisions of the Shoreline Management Act; and WHEREAS, the DOE's new rules are set forth in WAC 173 -26, and these new rules provide direction to local jurisdictions concerning the regulation of uses on shorelines of the State; and WHEREAS, RCW 90.58.080 directs local governments to develop or amend their shoreline master programs consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by the DOE, in accordance with a schedule established in that section; and WHEREAS, the timetable set forth in RCW 90.58.080(2)(a)(ii) requires the City of Tukwila to amend its Shoreline Master Program by December 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City began an update of its Shoreline Master Program in 1998, established a Citizens Advisory Panel for initial policy and regulation guidance, prepared background studies and used consultant services to prepare technical documents; and WHEREAS, the City renewed and continued its updating of the Shoreline Master Program in 2008; and WHEREAS, an environmental checklist was prepared for the staff draft Shoreline Master Program update, accompanied by a draft "Cumulative Impacts Analysis," an "Inventory and Characterization Report" and draft "Restoration Plan," and a Determination of Non Significance was issued August 13, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed a staff draft Shoreline Master Program, held a public hearing on August 27, 2008, continued the hearing to October 9, 2008 to allow additional public input, and recommended adoption of a revised Shoreline Master Program to the City Council in February 2009; and W \Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Page 1 of 9 161 162 WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on April 20, 2009, continued the hearing to July 13, 2009 and July 20, 2009, and conducted ten in -depth work sessions to review the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed written and verbal testimony and approved revisions to the Planning Commission Recommended Draft Shoreline Master Program to address issues raised by interested parties, individual Councilmembers, staff and the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, throughout the process of updating the Shoreline Master Program, a variety of methods were used to notify the general public and property owners along the shoreline of the proposed Shoreline Master Program update, including mailings to property owners and tenants, notice boards along the Green River Trail, postings on the City's web site, the creation of a broadcast e-mail group that received updates of the shoreline review process and articles in the City's newsletter; and WHEREAS, the updated Shoreline Master Program will be implemented by revised shoreline regulations, codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.44; and WHEREAS, new and revised Zoning Code definitions, codified in Chapter 18.06 of the Tukwila Municipal Code, are required to implement the changes to TMC Chapter 18.44 and the updated Shoreline Master Program; and WHEREAS, notice has been provided to the Washington State Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Appurtenance" means a structure that is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a single family residence, including a garage, deck, driveway, utilities, fences, installation of a septic tank and drain field, and grading that does not exceed 250 cubic yards and does not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark (WAC 173- 27- 040(2)(g)). Section 2. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Armoring" means the control of shoreline erosion with hardened structures, such as bulkheads, sea walls and riprap. Section 3. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Bank" means the rising ground bordering a water body and forming an edge or slope. Section 4. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Bioengineering" means integrating living woody and herbaceous materials with organic (plants, wood, jute mats, coir logs, etc.) and inorganic materials (rocks, soils) to increase the strength and structure of the soil along a riverbank, accomplished by a dense matrix of roots that hold the soil together. The above ground vegetation increases the resistance to flow and reduces flow velocities by dissipating energy. Section 5. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Bulkhead" means vertical structures erected parallel to and near the ordinary high water mark for the purpose of protecting adjacent uplands from erosion from the action of waves or currents. Section 6. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Channel migration zone" means the area along a river within which the channel(s) can be reasonably predicted to migrate over time as a result of natural and normally occurring hydrological and related processes when considered with the characteristics of the river and its surroundings. W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Definieons.doc 12/9/2009 Page 2 of 9 Section 7. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Dike" means an embankment or structure built in the river channel to contain or redirect flow within the channel and prevent shoreline destabilization. Section 8. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Development, shoreline" means, when conducted within the Shoreline Jurisdiction on shorelands or shoreland areas as defined herein, a use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; construction of bulkheads; driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature that interferes with the normal public use of the waters overlying lands subject to the Shoreline Management Act at any stage of water level. Section 9. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Ecological/ecosystem functions (or shoreline functions)" means the work performed or role played by the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the maintenance of the aquatic and terrestrial environments that constitute the shoreline's natural ecosystem. See WAC 173- 26- 200(2)(c). Section 10. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Ecosystem -wide processes" means the suite of naturally occurring physical and geologic processes of erosion, transport, and deposition; and specific chemical processes that shape landforms within a specific shoreline ecosystem and determine both the types of habitat and the associated ecological functions. Section 11. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Environment designation" means the term used to describe the character of the shoreline in Tukwila based upon the recommended classification system established by WAC 173 -26 -211 and as further refined by Tukwila's Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Section 12. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Feasible" means, for the purpose of the Shoreline Master Program, that an action such as a development project, mitigation, or preservation requirement meets all of the following conditions: 1. The action can be accomplished with technologies and methods that have been used in the past in similar circumstances, or studies or tests have demonstrated in similar circumstances that such approaches are currently available and likely to achieve the intended results; 2. The action provides a reasonable likelihood of achieving its intended purpose; and 3. The action does not physically preclude achieving the project's primary intended legal use. In cases where these guidelines require certain actions unless they are infeasible, the burden of proving infeasibility is on the applicant. In determining an action's infeasibility, the reviewing agency may weigh the action's relative public costs and public benefits, considered in the short- and long -term time frames. Section 13. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Flood plain" means that land area susceptible to inundation with a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (synonymous with 100 -year flood plain). The limit of this area shall be based upon flood ordinance regulation maps or a reasonable method which meets the objectives of the Shoreline Management Act. Section 14. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Flood hazard reduction" means actions taken to reduce flood damage or hazards. Flood hazard reduction measures may consist of nonstructural or indirect measures such as setbacks, W Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Page 3 of 9 163 164 land use controls, wetland restoration, dike removal, use relocation, bioengineering measures, and storm water management programs, and of structural measures such as dikes and levees intended to contain flow within the channel, channel realignment, and elevation of structures consistent with the National Flood Insurance Program. Section 15. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Floodway" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot. Section 16. Definition Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.06.370, "Definitions," is amended to read as follows: 18.06.370 Grading "Grading" means activity that results in change of the cover or topography of the earth or any activity that may cause erosion, including clearing, excavation, filling and stockpiling. Section 17. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Large Woody Debris (LWD)" means whole trees with root wads and limbs attached, cut logs at least 4 inches in diameter along most of their length, and root wads at least 6.5 feet long and 8 inches in diameter. Large woody debris is installed to address a deficiency of habitat and natural channel forming processes. Section 18. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Levee" means a broad embankment of earth built parallel with the river channel to contain flow within the channel and prevent flooding from a designated design storm. Section 19. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Levee, minimum profile" means the minimum levee profile for any new or reconstructed levees is the King County 'Briscoe Levee" profile 2.5:1 overall slope with a 15 -foot mid -slope bench for maintenance access and native vegetation plantings. Section 20. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Mean Higher High Water (MHHW)" means the average of the higher high water height of each tidal day, and is used in determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for the tidally influenced portions of the river. Section 21. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Native vegetation" means vegetation with a genetic origin of Western Washington, Northern Oregon and Southern British Columbia, not including cultivars. Section 22. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "No Net Loss" means a standard intended to ensure that shoreline development or uses, whether permitted or exempt, are located and designed to avoid loss or degradation of shoreline ecological functions that are necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. Section 23. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Nonconforming use, shoreline" means a use or development that was lawfully constructed or established prior to the effective date of the Shoreline Management Act or the Shoreline Master Program or amendments thereto, but does not conform to present regulations or standards of the program. Section 24. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Non- water oriented uses" means those uses that are not water dependent, water related, or water enjoyment. W \Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Page 4 of 9 Section 25. Definition Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.06.605, "Definitions," is amended to read as follows: 18.06.605 Ordinary high water mark "Ordinary high water mark" means the mark that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters (all lakes, streams, and tidal water) are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or the Department of Ecology. In any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean high water. Section 26. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Overwater structure" means any device or structure projecting over the Ordinary High Water Mark, including, but not limited to, bridges, boat lifts, wharves, piers, docks, ramps, floats or buoys. Section 27. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Public access" means the ability of the general public to reach, touch or enjoy the water's edge, to travel on the waters of the state, and to view the water and the shoreline from adjacent locations. Public access may be provided by an owner by easement, covenant, or similar legal agreement of substantial walkways, corridors, parks, or other areas serving as a means of view and /or physical approach to public waters. The Director may approve limiting public access as to hours of availability, types of activity permitted, location and area. Section 28. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Regional detention facility" means a stormwater detention and /or retention facility that accepts flow from multiple parcels and /or public right -of -way. The facility may be public or private. Section 29. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Revetment" means a sloping structure built to increase bank strength and protect an embankment, or shore against erosion by waves or river currents. A revetment is usually built of rock riprap, wood, or poured concrete. One or more filter layers of smaller rock or filter cloth and "toe" protection are included. A revetment typically slopes and has a rough or jagged face. The slope differentiates it from a bulkhead, which is a vertical structure. Section 30. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Riparian" means the land along the margins of rivers and streams. Section 31. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Riverbank analysis and report" means a scientific study or evaluation conducted by qualified experts and the resulting report to evaluate the ground and /or surface hydrology and geology, the geomorphology and hydraulic characteristics of the river, the affected land form and its susceptibility to mass wasting, erosion, scouring and other geologic hazards or fluvial processes. The report shall include conclusions and recommendations regarding the effect of the proposed development on geologic and /or hydraulic conditions, the adequacy of the site to be developed, the impacts of the proposed development, alternative approaches to the proposed development, and measures to mitigate potential site specific and cumulative geological, hydrological and hydraulic impacts of the proposed development, including the potential adverse impacts to adjacent and down- current properties. Geotechnical/ hydrological /hydraulic reports shall conform to accepted technical standards and must be prepared by qualified professional engineers or geologists who have professional expertise about the regional and local shoreline geology and processes. Section 32. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: W \Word Processing Ordinances Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Page 5 of 9 165 166 "Shorelands or shoreland areas" means those lands extending landward for 200 feet in all directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the Ordinary High Water Mark; floodways and contiguous flood plain areas landward 200 feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes and tidal waters that are subject to the provisions of the Shoreline Management Act. Section 33. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Shoreline areas" means all "shorelines of the State" and shorelands" as defined in RCW 90.58.030. Section 34. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Shoreline jurisdiction" means the channel of the Green /Duwamish River, its banks, the upland area which extends from the Ordinary High Water Mark landward for 200 horizontal feet on each side of the river, floodways and all associated wetlands within its 100 -year flood plain. For the purpose of determining shoreline jurisdiction only, the floodway shall not include those lands that have historically been protected by flood control devices and therefore have not been subject to flooding with reasonable regularity. Section 35. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Shoreline modifications" means those actions that modify the physical configuration or qualities of the shoreline area through the construction or alteration of a physical element such as a dike, breakwater, pier, weir, dredged basin, fill, bulkhead, or other shoreline structure. "Shoreline modifications" may also include other actions such as clearing, grading or application of chemicals. Section 36. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Shoreline restoration or ecological restoration" means the re- establishment or upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes, functions or habitats, including any project that is approved by the Federal, State, King County, or City government or the WRIA 9 Steering Committee, is intended to provide habitat restoration and where the future use of the site is restricted through a deed restriction to prohibit non habitat uses. This may be accomplished through measures including, but not limited to, re- vegetation, removal of intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not imply a requirement for returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or pre- European settlement conditions. Section 37. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Shoreline stabilization" means actions taken to protect riverbanks or adjacent uplands from erosion resulting from the action of waves or river currents. "Hard" structural stabilization includes levees, bulkheads and revetments. "Soft" shoreline stabilization includes use of bioengineering measures where vegetation, logs, and /or certain types of rock are used to address erosion control and /or slope stability. Section 38. Definition Deleted. Ordinance 1758 §1 (part), as codified at TMC Section 18.06.765, "Shoreline Zone," is deleted. Section 39. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Significant tree, shoreline" means a single- trunked tree that is 4 inches or more in diameter at a height of 4 feet above the ground or a multi- trunked tree with a diameter of 2 inches or more (such as willows or vine maple). Section 40. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Significant vegetation removal" means the removal or alteration of trees, sluubs, and /or ground cover by clearing, grading, cutting, burning, chemical means, or other activity that causes significant ecological impacts to functions provided by such vegetation. The removal of invasive or noxious weeds does not constitute significant vegetation removal. Tree pruning, not including tree topping, where it does not affect ecological functions, does not constitute significant vegetation removal. W. Word Processing Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Page 6 of 9 Section 41. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Substantial development" means any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds $5,000 or as adjusted by the State to account for inflation, or any development that materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of the Shoreline Management Act, but are riot exempt from complying with the substantive requirements of this Shoreline Master Program. 1. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including repair of damage caused by accident, fire, or elements. 2. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. 3. Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures including, but not limited to, head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels. A feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial nature, and alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results from normal cultivation shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and /or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations. 4. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys. 5. Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his own use or for the use of his or her family, which residence does not exceed a height of 35 feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this chapter. 6. Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private non commercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and multiple family residences. This exception applies if either: (a) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed $2,500; or (b) in fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed $10,000, but if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding $2,500 occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, the subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development for the purpose of this chapter. 7. Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored ground water for the irrigation of lands. 8. The marking of property lines or corners on state owned lands, when such marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water. 9. Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system. 10. Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development authorization under this chapter, if: a. The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters; b. The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including, but not limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values; c. The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity; d. A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and W Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Page 7 of 9 167 168 e. The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550, "Oil or natural gas exploration in marine waters." 11. The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the Department of Agriculture or the department jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21C RCW. 12. Watershed restoration projects, which means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities: a. A project that involves less than ten miles of stream reach, in which less than 25 cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings. b. A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water. c. A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the state, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or instream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than 200 square feet in floor area and is located above the Ordinary High Water Mark of the stream. 13. Watershed restoration plan, which means a plan developed or sponsored by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Department of Ecology, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re- creation, or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act. 14. A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: a. The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife; b. The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Chapter 77.55 RCW; and c. The local government has determined the project is substantially consistent with the local shoreline master program. The local government shall make such determination in a timely mariner and provide it by letter to the project proponent. Additional criteria for determining eligibility of fish habitat projects are found in WAC 173 -27 -040 2 (p) and apply to this exemption. Section 42. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Water dependent" means a use or portion of a use that cannot exist in a location that is not adjacent to the water and which is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operations. Examples of water dependent uses include ship cargo terminal loading areas, marinas, ship building and dry docking, float plane facilities, sewer outfalls, and shoreline ecological restoration projects. Section 43. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Water enjoyment" means a recreational use or other use that facilitates public access to the shoreline as a primary characteristic of the use. The use must be open to the general public and the shoreline- oriented space within the project must be devoted to the specific aspects of the use that fosters shoreline enjoyment. Examples of water enjoyment uses include parks, piers, museums, restaurants, educational /scientific reserves, resorts and mixed -use projects. Section 44. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: W\ Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Page 8 of 9 "Water oriented" means a use that is water dependent, water related or water enjoyment or a combination of such uses. Section 45. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "Water related" means a use or portion of a use that is not intrinsically dependent on a waterfront location but whose economic viability is dependent upon a waterfront location because: a. The use has a functional requirement for a waterfront location such as the arrival or shipment of materials by water or the need for large quantities of water; or b. The use provides a necessary service supportive of the water dependent uses and the proximity of the use to its customers makes its services less expensive and /or more convenient. Examples of water related uses are warehousing of goods transported by water, seafood processing plants, hydroelectric generating plants, gravel storage when transported by barge, and log storage or oil refineries where transport is by tanker. Section 46. Definition Added. A new definition is added to TMC Chapter 18.06 to read as follows: "WRIA" means Water Resource Inventory Area river basin planning and management areas formalized under Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173 500 -04 and authorized under the Water Resources Act of 1971, RCW 90.54. WRIA 9 refers to the Green /Duwamish River Basin within which Tukwila is located. Section 47. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 48. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force upon approval of the Shoreline Master Program by the Washington State Department of Ecology and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Special Meeting thereof this day of 2009. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Office of the City Attorney W\ Word Processing \Ordinances \Shoreline Definitions.doc 12/9/2009 Jim Haggerton, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number. Page 9 of 9 169 170 Tentative Agenda Schedule M ONTH MEETING 1 MEETING 2 MEETING 3 MEETING 4 REGULAR' C.O.W. REGULAR C.O.W. December 7 25th Christmas (City offices closed) January 4 1' —New Years Day (City offices closed) 18th —M.L. King, Jr. Day (City offices closed) Special Presentation: Oath of Office administered for Council positions with terms ending December 31, 2013: Verna Griffin, Position #1 Allan Ekberg, Position #3 Joe Duffie, Position #5 De'Sean Quinn, Position #7 Unfinished Business: Police evidence facility New Business: Election of 2010 Council President 14 See agenda packet cover sheet for this week's agenda (December 14, 2009 Committee of the Whole Meeting, to be immediately followed by a Special Meeting) 11 Special Issues: Parks Recreation fees 21 28 19 (Tuesday) 25 171 172 14th (Monday) 15th (Tuesday) Community Affairs Parks Cmte, 5. 00 PM (CR #3) 3 City Council Committee of the Whole Mtg., 7:00 PM (Council Chambers) C.O.W TO BE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED BY A SPECIAL MEETING 21st (Monday) City Council Regular Mtg., 7:00 PM Tentative Puget Sound Blood Center TUKWILA BLOOD DRIVE 9:00 to 11:00 AM 12:00 to 3:00 PM (Auditorium at Boeing Employees Credit Union, 12770 Gateway Dr.) For more information or to schedule an appointment to donate blood, contact Mary at 206- 439 -5981 or e-mail mtoal @becu.org Utilitics Cmtc. CANCELLED 22nd (Tuesday) Upcoming Meetings Events DECEMBER 2009 16th (Wednesday) Parks Commission, 5:30 PM (Community Center) Library Advisory Board, 7:00 PM (Foster Library) 17th (Thursday) Crime Hot Spots Task Force Mtg., 10:00 AM (CR #5) Domestic Violence Task Force, 12:00 NOON (Hunan Svcs. ofce) Tukwila Historical Society, 7:00 PM (Nelsen Historical Trust House) 23rd (Wednesday) 24th (Thursday) COPCAB MEETING WAS HELD ON DEC. 9 18th (Friday) TUKWILA FIRE 1 -lades One -day ham radio class and written exam for technician level ham radio license ($14.00 fee). 9:00 AM to 4:00 PM Class size is limited. To register send an e-mail to Matt at hickey -m@ ci.tukwila.wa.us. 25th (Friday) Christmas Day City offices closed IR Court Busy Court and /or Jury Calendar (noted to alert employees and citizens of potential parking difficulty). 19th (Saturday) 26th (Saturday) Blvd. Action Cmtc's Trash Pickup Day EVENT WAS HELD ON DEC. 12 D Arts Commission: 1 st Tues., 5.30 PM, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2342. Chamber of Commerce's Tukwila Government and Community Affairs Committee: 1st Tues., 12:00 Noon, Chamber Offices. Contact Nancy Damon at 206 -575 -1633. r^ City Council Committee of Whole (C.O.W.) Meeting: 2nd 4th Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. >City Council Regular Meeting: 1st 3rd Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. Civil Service Commission: 1st Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #3. Contact Bev Willison at 206- 433 -1844. Community Affairs Parks Committee: 2nd 4th Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #3. Agenda items for 12/14/09 meeting: (A) Rental licensing update. (B) Noise ordinance update. (C) Planning Commission and Board of Architectural Review roles and responsibilities. (D) Resolution supporting the Tukwila School District's capital levy for instructional technology and school improvements. COPCAB (Community Oriented Policing Citizens Adv. Board): 4th Wed., 6:30 PM, Conf. Rm #5. Phi Huynh (206- 433 7175). Crime Hot Spots Task Force: 3rd Thurs., 10:00 AM, Conf. Room #5. Contact Phi Huynh at 206- 433 -7175. Domestic Violence Task Force: 3rd Thurs., 12:00 Noon, Human Services Office. Contact Stacy Hansen at 206 433 -7181 Equity Diversity Commission: 1st Thurs., 5 15 PM, Conf. Room #3. Contact Kimberly Matej at 206 433 -1834 Finance Safety Committee: 1st 3rd Tues., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #3. ➢Human Services Advisory Brd: 2nd Fri. of even months, 10:00 AM, Human Services Office. Contact Evie Boykan at 206- 433 -7180. Human Services Providers: Quarterly, 11.30 AM, TCC (2009 3/20, 6/19, 9/18, and 12/4). Contact Stacy Hansen at 206- 433 -7181 Library Advisory Board: 3rd Wed., 7:00 PM, Foster Library. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2342. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee: Every other month (or as scheduled), 12:00 NOON. Contact Katherine Kertzman at 206 -575 -2489 Parks Commission: 3rd Wed., 5:30 PM, Senior Game Room at Community Center. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2342. Planning Commission /Board of Architectural Review: 4th Thurs., except 2nd Thursday in Nov. Dec., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. Contact Wynetta Bivens at 206 -431 -3670. Sister City Committee: 1st Wed., 5:30 PM, Conf. Room #3. Contact Bev Willison at 206- 433 -1844. Transportation Committee: 1st 3rd Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #1. Tukwila Historical Society: 3rd Thurs., 7:00 PM (meeting location varies). Contact Pat Brodin at 206- 433 -1860. >Tukwila Int'I. Blvd. Action Cmte: 2nd Tues., 7:00 PM, Tukwila Community Center Contact Chief Dave Haynes at 206 -433 -1812. Utilities Committee: 2nd 4th Tues., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #1. 12/15/09 meeting has been cancelled.